Agenda of Council Meeting - 20 May 2019



Council MeetingNotice PaperMonday 20 May 2019 at 7pmCouncil Chamber, Malvern Town Hall,(enter off Glenferrie Road, Malvern)VisionStonnington will be an inclusive, healthy, creative, sustainable and smart community.Council’s vision will be implemented through four key pillars:Community: An inclusive City that enhances the health and wellbeing of all residents, where people can feel safe, socially connected and engaged.Liveability: The most desirable place to live, work and visit.Environment: A cleaner, safer and better environment for current and future generations to enjoy.Economy: A City that will grow its premier status as a vibrant, innovative and creative business community.These pillars reflect the shared priorities of our community and Council, and are consistent with our history and vision for a liveable future. For each pillar, there is a framework for our strategies, actions and measures which outline the key services and projects to be delivered to our community. The Strategic Resource Plan sets out how Council will provide the resources needed to implement strategies and actions within the Council Plan.Councillors Cr Steven Stefanopoulos, MayorCr Glen AtwellCr John ChandlerCr Sally DavisCr Marcia GriffinCr Judy HindleCr Jami KlisarisCr Matthew KoceCr Melina SehrNOTESCouncil business is conducted in accordance with Part 4 Division 3 of the Meeting Procedure section of Council’s General Local Law 2018 (No 1). Some copies are available with the agenda or you can find a copy on Council’s website stonnington..au under local laws.Councillors carry out the functions, powers, authorities and discretions vested with them under the Local Government Act 1989, and any other relevant legislation. Councillors impartially perform the Office of Councillor duties, in the best interests of the City of Stonnington residents to the best of their skills and judgement.Councillors must formally declare their conflicts of interest in relation to any items listed on the agenda at the start of the meeting and immediately prior to the item being considered, in accordance with Sections 77 to 79 of the Act.READING OF THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENTWe acknowledge that we are meeting on the traditional land of the Boonwurrung and Wurundjeri people and offer our respects to the elders past and present. We recognise and respect the cultural heritage of this land.READING OF THE AFFIRMATION STATEMENTWe are reminded that as Councillors we are bound by our Oath of Office to undertake the duties of Councillor in the best interests of the people of the City of Stonnington and to faithfully and impartially carry out the functions, powers, authorities and discretions vested in us under the Local Government Act and any other relevant ActWelcomeWelcome to a Stonnington City Council meeting. These meetings are an important way to ensure that your democratically elected Councillors work for you in a fair and transparent way. About this meetingThe first page of tonight’s agenda shows the different parts to the meeting, some of these are administrative and are required by Stonnington’s Local Law.In the agenda you will also find a list of all the items to be discussed under ‘General Business’. Each report is written by a council officer and outlines the purpose of the report, relevant information and a recommended decision for councillors.Council will consider the report and either accept, reject or make amendments to the recommendation. Council decisions are adopted if they receive a majority vote from the Councillors present at this meeting. Arrangements to ensure meetings are accessible to the publicCouncil meetings are held at the Malvern Town Hall, corner High Street and Glenferrie Road (entry via Glenferrie Road by the door closest to the Malvern Police Station).The Malvern Town Hall has an entrance ramp and elevators to ensure that the Council Chamber is accessible to the public. Fully accessible toilet and bathroom facilities are also available. If you require translation, interpreting services or a hearing loop set up, please contact Council’s civic support on 03 8290 1331 to make appropriate arrangements before the meeting. To ensure that people in the chamber can follow the meetings’ proceedings, proposed alternate resolutions, also known as ‘yellows’, are displayed on a screen and microphones are used during debate.Live webcasting Council meetings are webcast live via Council’s website, allowing those interested to view proceedings without attending Council meetings.This gives people who may otherwise be unable to attend access to Council decisions and debate. A recording of the meeting is available on our website after the meeting (usually within 48 hours).Only Councillors and Council officers seated around the Council table are visible on film. People in the public gallery will not be filmed, but if you speak, you will be recorded. Visit stonnington..au for more information.Members of the galleryIf you choose to attend a council meeting as a member of the public gallery, you should note the role of the Chairperson and your responsibilities under the City of Stonnington General Local Law 2018(1).Extracts from the Local Law:81.Gallery to be SilentVisitors must not interject or take part in the debate.The gallery must be silent at all times during any Council Meeting.The ring tones of mobile telephones and other devices must be turned off by people in the gallery at all times.88.Recording or Filming ProceedingsA person must not operate an audio tape, mobile telephone or other recording or transmitting equipment or film ('a device') at any Council Meeting without first obtaining the consent of the Chairperson. Consent given under sub-clause (1) may be revoked by the Chairperson at any time during the course of a meeting.If a device is operated, or suspected of being operated, in contravention of sub-clause (1), the Chairperson may:order the person operating, or suspected of operating, the device to produce the device to the Chairperson; andarrange for any matter that has been recorded on the device in contravention of sub-clause (1) to be deleted, erased or otherwise removed from the device.Subject to sub-clause (5), the Chairperson shall return any device that has been produced to him or her pursuant to sub-clause (3) at the conclusion of the relevant Council Meeting.If the Chairperson has been unable to arrange for the matter that has been recorded on the device in contravention of sub-clause (1) to be deleted, erased or otherwise removed from the device, the device shall be returned to the person as soon as practicable after the deletion, erasure or removal has been carried out.84.Removal from Chamber of a Councillor or Member of the PublicThe Chairperson, or Council in the case of a suspension under clause 82, may ask any Authorised Officer or member of Victoria Police to remove from the meeting (including the gallery):(1)any person who the Chairperson has ordered to be removed under clause 82(3); or(2)any Councillor who has been suspended under clause 82 and who has not immediately left the Council Meeting.50.Questions to Council from Members of the PublicQuestions to Council from members of the public will be considered as part of the order of business of an Ordinary Meeting only when submitted in the format outlined below:(a) Questions must be in writing and lodged at the office of the Chief Executive Officer by 12 noon on the day of the next scheduled Ordinary Meeting.(b) A limit of five (5) questions per questioner applies.(c) Questions must include the name and address of the questioner and the date of the question. Questions by facsimile or email are acceptable.Within four (4) working days of receiving a complying question to Council from a member of the public, the Chief Executive Officer will dispatch a notice to the member of the public who submitted the question, advising that the question has been received.At a meeting at which a question is to be considered:The Chairperson will acknowledge that a question or questions have been received from a (named) person and ask if that questioner is in the gallery. If the questioner is present in the gallery, a summary of the subject matter of the question(s) will be read out by the Chairperson and the questioner advised that a written reply to the question(s) will be issued within 14 days of that meeting date.If the questioner is not in the gallery, Council will respond to the question(s) in accordance with any standard correspondence to Council.The Chairperson has the discretion to allow a question to be asked and/or answered at the meeting that is in variance with the procedure in this Local Law.The Chairperson may refuse to acknowledge a question if, in the opinion of the Chairperson, the question is, or is potentially, defamatory, indecent, offensive, abusive, objectionable in language or substance, irrelevant, trivial, aimed at embarrassing a Councillor or a member of Council staff, outside Council’s powers or functions, has been asked at a previous Council Meeting and a reply issued, or relates to matters that come under section 89(2) of the Act.Any question relating to electoral matter during an Election Period will not be considered at any Council Meeting.(7) A copy of the questions and responses will be tabled and inserted into the minutes of the following Council Meeting.47.Open Meetings(1) Subject to sub-clause (2), Council Meetings must be open to members of the public pursuant to section 89(1) of the Act.(2)Council may resolve, under section 89(2) of the Act, that a meeting be closed to members of the public if Confidential Business is to be discussed.Your cooperation is appreciated, we hope you enjoy the meeting.Mayor and Councillors, Stonnington City CouncilCouncil MeetingNotice PaperMonday 20 May 2019Order of Business and Index SEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATa)Reading of the Reconciliation Statement and Affirmation StatementSEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATb)IntroductionsSEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATc)Apologies SEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATd)Adoption and confirmation of minutes of previous meeting(s) in accordance with Section 93 of the Act and Clause 49 of General Local Law 2018 (No 1)1.Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 6 May 2019 PAGEREF PDF2_Minutes_1 \h 9 SEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATe)Disclosure by Councillors of any conflicts of interest in accordance with Section 79 of the ActSEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATf)Questions to Council from Members of the Public (Clause 50 of General Local Law 2018 (No 1)SEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATg)Correspondence – (only if related to council business)SEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATh)Questions to Council Officers from CouncillorsSEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATi)Tabling of Petitions and Joint LettersSEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATj)Notices of Motion SEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATk)Reports of Special and Other Committees; - Assembly of Councillors SEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATl)Reports by Delegates SEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATm)General Business including Other General Business SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 1.Planning Application 0979/18 - 1 Smyth Street Toorak - Construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential Zone PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7164 \h 11 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 2.Planning Application 1209/18 - 45 Argo Street, South Yarra - Extension of a dwelling in a Neighbourhood Residential Zone PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7165 \h 35 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 3.Delivery of Stage one of the Toorak Park and Victory Square Masterplan PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7175 \h 45 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 4.Summary of initial community consultation and draft Mount Street Masterplan PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7174 \h 51 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 5.Regional Business Case Advance Waste and Resource Recovery Technologies PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7173 \h 61 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 6.1 / 8 Motherwell Street South Yarra - Vehicle Crossing Application PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7176 \h 71 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 7.Council Financial Report for the Period Ending 31 March 2019 PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7171 \h 75 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 8.Appointment of Authorised Officers pursuant to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 - Statutory Planning PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7168 \h 79 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 9.S6 Instrument of Delegation from Council to Organisational Roles PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7169 \h 81 SEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATn)Urgent BusinessSEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATo)Confidential Business1.Request Ministerial Intervention PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7166 \h 832.Status Report: Chief Executive Officer Appointment PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7177 \h 83 RecommendationThat the Council confirms the Minutes of the Council Meeting of the Stonnington City Council held on 6 May 2019 and Minutes of the Confidential Meeting of the Stonnington City Council held on 6 May 2019 as an accurate record of the proceedings. m)General Business1.Planning Application 0979/18 - 1 Smyth Street Toorak - Construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential ZoneActing Manager Statutory Planning: Hannah McBride-Burgess General Manager Planning & Amenity: Stuart Draffin PurposeFor Council to consider a planning application for the construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential Zone Schedule 10 at 1 Smyth Street, Toorak.Executive SummaryApplicant:Atcon Property Pty Ltd C/- UrbisWard:NorthZone:General Residential ZoneOverlay:NilNeighbourhood Precinct: Garden Suburban 1Date lodged:27 September 2018Statutory days:59Trigger for referral to Council:20 objections receivedCultural Heritage PlanNoNumber of objections:16 propertiesConsultative Meeting:Yes - held on 26 February 2019Officer Recommendation:Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning PermitBackgroundThe ProposalThe plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by Christopher Doyle Architects are known as Drawing No.s: PD01-PD36 (Council date stamped 22 March 2019).In addition to the above, the following documents were submitted to support the application:?Planning Report - Urbis, Council date stamped 27 September 2018?Traffic Impact Assessment - O’Brien Traffic, Council date stamped 27 September 2018?Arboricultural Assessment - John Patrick, Council date stamped 27 September 2018?SDA and WSUD response - F2 Design, Council date stamped 27 September 2018?Waste Management Plan, Council date stamped 27 September 2018?Landscaping Plan - John Patrick, Council date stamped 22 March 2019The application proposes to construct a three storey residential building comprising five 3-bedroom dwellings with a total of 11 car spaces provided in a basement level, accessed via Smyth Street.Key features of the proposal are:?The Basement includes the provision of 11 car spaces (two allocated to each dwelling, with an additional space allocated to Dwelling 5 (top level), with associated storage, services bin room and access to the central lift/lobby core.?Ground Floor comprises Dwelling 1 positioned to the west, oriented to Smyth Street, with Dwelling 2 located to the rear and a central entry lobby accessed via a pedestrian gate to the south of the Smyth street frontage. Private open space for Dwellings 1 and 2 is provided in the form of a terraced area for each of the dwellings. Access to the Basement level is provided via a single width crossover to the north of the Smyth Street frontage at ground level, with the accessway positioned along the northern boundary of the site.?First Floor level comprises Dwellings 3 and 4, with Dwelling 3 oriented to the Smyth Street frontage and Dwelling 4 to the rear, separated by the central lobby and lift. Private open space to Dwellings 3 and 4 is provided in the form of a balcony to each dwelling.?Second Floor is comprised of Dwelling 5, with balconies located to the west (Smyth Street fa?ade) as well as to the rear. ?The proposed development has an overall height of 9.85 metres from natural ground level. ?The residential building is of simplified period design expression, with materials and finishes including brick, render and a pitched, slate tile roof.Site and SurroundsThe site is located on the eastern side of Smyth Street and due to the configuration of the street and surrounding allotments, is the only allotment with a Smyth Street address. The adjoining allotments are described in greater detail below. The site has the following significant characteristics:?The site is generally rectangular in shape, has a frontage to Smyth Street of 18.0 metres, a site depth of 46.5 metres and yields a total site area of approximately 837 square metres. ?Due to the configuration of the adjoining streets, the southern boundary of the subject site includes a frontage to Ashe Grove at the south-west corner of the site for a length of approximately 13 metres.?The site is generally flat, with a minimal downward slope towards the rear (east) of the site.?The site is generally devoid of vegetation, with one small Camellia tree located adjacent to the south boundary (Tree 11 as identified within the submitted Arborist report). There are a number of small-medium sized canopy trees located within adjoining properties within close proximity (less than 2.0 metres) of the title boundaries of the subject site. Three street trees are located within the frontages to Smyth Street and Ashe Grove. The two street trees within the frontage to Smyth Street (identified as Trees 3 and 4) are Pin Oaks, which are proposed to be retained. The most significant tree associated with the site is the English Oak (Tree 2) which is located in a visually prominent location within the Ashe Grove street reserve and is also to be retained.?Vehicle access to the site is gained via an existing single crossover to the Smyth Street frontage, positioned approximately 4.7 metres from the title boundary at the corner of Smyth and Ashe Grove. The crossover provides access to an existing concrete driveway which runs along the southern side of the existing dwelling to the rear of the allotment, to a double garage.Land adjoining the subject site is described as follows:?North – The northern boundary of the subject site is shared by several properties, fronting Tashinny Road. These properties (6-8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 Tashinny Road) generally abut the subject site with their areas of rear secluded private open space.oNo’s 6-8 Tashinny Road contain two attached single storey brick dwellings with hipped, tiled roof forms. Both dwellings are oriented to Tashinny Road, with private open space in the rear (north of the subject site) and no onsite car parking provision. Planning Permit 76/17 was issued under delegation by Council 4 January 2018 for 6-8 Tashinny Road and allows for the construction of two three-storey townhouses. It is noted that a building permit was issued for the demolition of the existing dwellings in August 2018 (no planning permit required) however demolition of the adjoining dwellings has not commenced at the writing of this report.o12 Tashinny Road comprises a single storey brick dwelling with a combination of a pitched, tiled roof and a pressed metal roof. On-site parking is not provided and secluded private open space is located in the rear. o14 and 16 Tashinny Road accommodate residential dwellings with a shared wall along the central property boundary. The dwellings are constructed with a combination of a pitched, tiled roof and a pressed metal roof. Secluded private open space is in the rear of the properties, with landscaping in both the front and rear setbacks.?South – To the south, the subject site abuts 10 Ashe Grove, which is a single storey rendered brick dwelling. The dwelling features a tiled roof, with a crossover to Ashe Grove. Private open space is provided to the rear (east), which accommodates landscaping and a small outbuilding. The dwelling includes habitable room windows facing north, towards the subject site.?East – The subject site abuts the properties at 8 and 12 Ellerslie Place to the east.o8 Ellerslie Place accommodates a two-storey apartment building with basement car parking. The rear setbacks of the development from the shared boundary at both levels are minimal. There is no secluded private open space in the rear of the development, abutting the subject site.o12 & 14 Ellerslie Place accommodates two single storey attached dwellings, each provided with a crossover in the north-east (No 12) and south-east (No 14), providing access to on-site parking for each dwelling. Secluded private open space to each dwellings is to the rear (west), abutting the subject site. A large tree and scattered vegetation are located in the rear secluded private open space of No 12, with minimal vegetation located within the secluded private open space of No 14.?West – Smyth Street immediately abuts the subject site to the west. This street facilitates two-way access with on street parking available on both sides of the road. 11 Ashe Grove is located on the opposite side of the road, which accommodates a single storey dwelling. The site is located on the corner of Smyth Street and Ashe Grove. The dwelling is constructed with a pitched tiled roof and includes high solid fencing to Smyth Street and Ashe Grove with landscaping throughout.The immediate neighbourhood of Smyth Street and Ashe Grove is characterised by an intimate scale and a mix of one, two and three-storey dwellings. The subject site is located between the Toorak Village and Hawksburn Village Activity Centres, which are both considered to be Large Neighbourhood Activity Centres. The site has convenient access to public transport and commercial facilities, with Hawksburn Railway Station located 215 metres and Toorak Village located 500m from the site.Previous Planning Application(s)A search of Council records indicates no relevant planning permit history associated with the site The TitleThe site is described on Certificate of Title Volume 03435 Folio 987 / Lot 1 on Plan of Subdivision 376408D and no covenants or easements affect the land.Planning ControlsThe following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:Zone?Clause 32.08 – General Residential Zone (GRZ)Pursuant to Clause 32.08-6 a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot.Particular Provisions?Clause 52.06 – Car Parking?Clause 52.34 – Bicycle Facilities?Clause 55 – Construction of two or more Dwellings on a lot (including Clause 55.07 – Apartment Developments)Pursuant to Clause 32.08-4 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot. A development must meet the requirements of Clause 55.Schedule 10 (Garden River and Garden Suburban Precincts) to the GRZ sets out a maximum height limit of 9.0m (or 10.0m if the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8m of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more). The proposed development qualifies for the maximum allowable height of 10.0 metres due to the topography of the land as demonstrated on Site Section plan PD36. The proposal is compliant as it seeks to construct to a maximum height of 10.0 metres from natural ground level with no more than three storeys at any point.Schedule 10 to the GRZ also varies Standards B8 (Site Coverage), B13 (Landscaping), B17 (Side and Rear Setbacks) and B18 (Walls on Boundaries) of Clause 55.Clause 32.08-4 provides a mandatory minimum Garden Area requirement of 35% to be achieved for the construction of a residential building on a lot greater than 650 square metres. The proposal seeks to provide a total Garden Area of 38.2% which is compliant.Relevant Planning PoliciesClause 11SettlementClause 15 Built Environment and HeritageClause 16.01Residential DevelopmentClause 21.05HousingClause 21.06Built Environment and HeritageClause 22.05Environmentally Sustainable DesignClause 22.18Stormwater ManagementClause 22.23Neighbourhood Character PolicyClause 32.08General Residential ZoneClause 52.06Car ParkingClause 52.34Bicycle FacilitiesClause 53.18Stormwater Management in Urban DevelopmentClause 55 Two or more Dwellings on a Lot (ResCode)Clause 65Decision GuidelinesAdvertisingThe application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land (and by placing two signs on the site). The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily.The site is located in North Ward and 20 objections from 16 different properties have been received. Grounds of objection are summarized as follows:?Inconsistent with neighbourhood character?Apartment typology is not appropriate for the site?Loss of sunlight?Impacts on amenity of adjoining properties (overshadowing/overlooking/loss of privacy)?The height and scale of the building is excessive?Pedestrian access from Ashe Grove requires pedestrians to cross the driveway of 10 Ashe Grove?Impacts to the streetscape due to the scale of the proposal?No precedent for more than two dwellings on a lot in the area?Increased traffic congestion and parking issues within the surrounding road network?No visitor parking provision?Impacts on existing street trees?The number of windows abutting neighbouring properties should be reduced?Impacts of additional noise (residential)?Loss of views?Impacts during construction?Loss of surrounding property valueA Consultative Meeting was held on 26 February 2019. The meeting was attended by Councillor Koce, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council planning officer. The meeting resulted in changes to the plans which were submitted via a Section 57A Amendment (the plans described within the Proposal section of this report) which are described as follows:?Relocation of the pedestrian access from the southern boundary to the Smyth Street frontage; and?Changes to the external design detail of the development.It is noted that the revisions did not result in an increase in material detriment to affected properties and as such, were not required to be formally advertised. Notwithstanding this, the revised plans were circulated to objectors 3 April 2019 for information purposes.ReferralsUrban Design?The proposal has been satisfactorily amended to address my earlier pre-application comments relating to the scale and bulk of the building and the potential impact on the large street tree.?The only remaining question relates to the design character. As proposed, the design reflects strong historical character references. A more subtle and elegant contemporary design expression would be preferred. Officer Comment:It is noted that the above comments were provided with regard to the advertised plans. The plans were amended via Section 57A following advertising to address outstanding concerns, one of which being the design expression. Council’s Urban Design Advisor has since reviewed the revised plans and is supportive of the revised design, with the following comment provided:?The proposal has been satisfactorily amended to address my previous comments (dated 05/07/18 and 18/12/18).Transport & Parking?The proposal includes 11 parking spaces provided on-site, the number of parking spaces meets the requirements of the Planning Scheme and is considered satisfactory. ?The traffic generated by the proposed development with access for 11 vehicles provided via Smyth Street is unlikely to have a significant impact on the operation of the surrounding road network.?The plans show that the basement car park will have access from Smyth Street provided by an accessway ramp. The width of this accessway has been dimensioned at 3m between 300mm wide kerbs. This meets the requirements of the Australian Standards for a ramp between kerbs and can be considered satisfactory.?The elevations show that the height between the floor and car park entrance is proposed at 2.2m. This meets the requirements of the Australian Standards.?A swept path diagram has been provided demonstrating that a B85 vehicle can access the property from Smyth Street. It appears that a B85 vehicle can access/egress the property in one movement which is supported, however the applicant is to provide a detailed swept path analysis to clearly show that access and egress can be achieved by a B99 vehicle in one movement.?The standard parking spaces have been dimensioned at 5.4m long by 2.4m wide accessed via a 6.4m wide aisle. Although not designed to the requirements of the Planning Scheme, the parking spaces meet the requirements of the Australian Standards. ?The kerb side length available for on-street parking would be altered. Based on this new arrangement it would appear that one on-street parking space along the frontage of the site would be maintained just relocated, this is supported.Officer Comment:The above comments are noted and swept path diagrams confirming B99 vehicle access can be addressed via conditions of any approval granted.Parks?A Tree Deed will be required for the Quercus robur (English Oak – Tree 2) as a condition, with a bond to be paid to the value of $21,085.?A Tree Management Plan will be required for this site.? All street trees will need to be protected with special attention paid to the large Quercus robur on the south side of the site. ?Specifically, to protect the Quercus robur root system, the Tree Management Plan will need to specify: ?oOutside the Alignment of the Basement where the building is within the Tree Protection Zone for Tree 2 (Quercus robur), the Ground Floor and all associated sub-flooring (suspended slab) must be built above grade supported by screw piles. ?The Tree Management Plan must detail among other things:oLocation and type of tree protection fencing, oMulching material and watering regime,oLocation of services and method of installation. Street tree root disturbance must be kept to a minimum,oBoundary fence materials and construction method,oSite Arborists qualifications,oSite inspection regime.?The impact on neighbours trees will be minor.?The trees will need to be included in the Tree Management Plan.?The landscape plan is suitable for endorsement subject to later detail being approved by the Responsible Authority.? Officer Comment:The above comments are noted and will form conditions of any approval granted.Infrastructure?No objection subject to conditions included on any approval granted.Officer Comment:Standard conditions will be included in any approval granted.Waste Management?The Waste Management Plan must specify/detail the location and dimensions of the bin storage room. ?The Waste Management Plan’s allocation of garbage bins is in excess of the Stonnington standard allocation of 120 litres per household per week and would result in one tenement having an elevated garbage charge. To maintain all tenements with the ‘Minimum Garbage Charge’, an overall residential garbage storage capacity of no more than 120 litres per household per week must be achieved. ?Any Planning Permit issued for this development must include a condition specifically requiring the submission and approval of a WMP. Once a Planning Permit has been issued for the development, a WMP (similar to that previewed here but amended to address the issues raised above) should be submitted for approval. Officer Comment:The above comments are noted and will form conditions of any approval granted.Key IssuesStrategic JustificationOverarching policies of the Stonnington Planning Scheme encourage urban consolidation in established urban areas and medium density residential development in and around neighbourhood activity centres, where it is close to public transport. These strategies call for well-designed medium-density development that respects neighbourhood character, improves housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency.In accordance with Clause 21.03-2 (Strategic Vision), the subject site is situated beside an activity centre and is within close proximity of multiple main roads (Williams, Malvern, Toorak and Orrong Roads) which are serviced by public transport. On this basis, it is considered that the subject site is an appropriate location to direct higher-density residential development.In addition, the subject land is not affected by any overlay provisions and has a site area of approximately 837 square metres which is considered to be capable of accommodating increased density in line with the policy.In principle, the redevelopment of this land to provide additional housing opportunities in a well-serviced location is supported. Specific elements of the proposal are examined in detail below.AssessmentNeighbourhood CharacterThe subject neighbourhood generally displays a varied built form character with regard to scale and architectural style. There are examples of single detached dwellings with pitched tiled roof forms, combined with higher density, modern developments which are an emerging character within the immediate context.Clause 21.05 (Housing) of the Stonnington Planning Scheme provides direction and policy justification regarding housing supply and the location of residential development within the City of Stonnington. Clause 21.05 seeks to address key issues such as optimising the location of higher density residential development, maintaining distinction between development outcomes in higher vs lower density areas and acknowledging the impact of increased residential density on neighbourhood character and residential amenity. In order to address the aforementioned key issues, residentially zoned land within the municipality is categorised as either a substantial, incremental or minimal change area. It is noted that the subject site does not have an immediate abuttal to a main road, is not beside or opposite a railway station, is not within a Principal, Major or Large Neighbourhood Activity Centre, is not beside a Small Neighbourhood Activity Centre and is not within a Mixed Use Zone (qualifiers for categorisation as a Substantial Change Area). Therefore, the site is categorised as being within an Incremental Change Area which includes remaining residential areas (outside the Heritage Overlay and Neighbourhood Character Overlay), and directs multi-unit development (2-3 storeys) to lots capable of accommodating increased density.As set out by Clause 22.23 (Neighbourhood Character Policy) of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, the subject site and surrounds are located within a Garden Suburban Precinct 1. The statement of preferred character associated with the Garden Suburban 1 precinct directs the following: The Garden Suburban 1 (GS1) precinct comprises leafy streetscapes with a range of Victorian, Edwardian or Interwar era and contemporary buildings set in established garden surrounds. In typical streets regular front and side setbacks provide space around buildings and allow for small, well designed garden areas that contribute to the landscape quality of the street. New buildings or additions offer innovative and contemporary design responses while complementing the key aspects of form, general one-two storey scale and design detail of the older buildings. Low, visually permeable front fences retain views to gardens and dwellings from the street. Areas within a Residential Growth or Mixed Use Zone or within a substantial change area will accommodate more development with a more compact setting but with space for canopy trees and other vegetation and high quality, responsive design.It is important to note that whilst the statement of preferred character references ‘general one-two storey scale’, this does not exclude opportunities for three-storey development, as is contemplated by the Zone, where the development is reflective and respectful of elements of existing and emerging neighbourhood character.When assessing the proposed built form, Council's Urban Designer has indicated support with regard to the building typology, scale and design detail. It is noted that the proposed design is of a ‘Neo-Classical/Contemporary hybrid’ style. The design detail proposed in the plans submitted with the application, including balustrading detail and design expression, have been simplified as shown on the formally revised plans which form the basis of Council’s decision. This seeks to ensure the design response is does not seek to mimic historical building details, which the Garden Suburban Precinct 1 specifically seeks to avoid.In achieving respect for neighbourhood character, proposed development is not required to replicate existing building stock or to stop change. Instead, it means designing the development to respond to the features and characteristics of the neighbourhood. The neighbourhood surrounding the subject site includes distinct examples of departure from conventionally styled dwellings. Although the proposal is more akin to newer development typology, this design approach is acceptable in principle.The proposal seeks to develop the subject site with a three-storey apartment style building comprising five dwellings, with an overall building height of 10.0 metres. The overall height is consistent with the mandatory requirements of the General Residential Zone Schedule 10. It is contemplated that despite its three storey form amongst predominantly single and double storey development, by virtue of its setbacks from all boundaries, landscaping opportunities, recessed upper levels and materiality, the proposed development will not result in built form that significantly deviates from the character of the area.The building is setback 4.6-6.8 metres from the Smyth Street frontage at Ground and First Floor levels, with setbacks of 4.7-5.7 metres at Second Floor level from the main projecting element. When considering the context of the immediate area, there is a pattern of front setbacks between 4.0-5.6 metres (excluding pergola/balcony encroachment) within Ashe Grove. In assessing what is considered to be an appropriate front setback for the subject site with regard to neighbourhood character, the average depth of setbacks in the surrounding area as well as prominence of the proposed development within the streetscape should be considered. As the proposal is consistent with the prevailing average depth of setbacks in the immediate area, it is contended that the proposed development represents an appropriate response. It is noted that the proposed 1.6-2.0 metre high front fence is compatible with the existing varied character of front fences within the street.It is noted that due to the irregular subdivision pattern of the area as well as varied orientation of dwellings and dwelling typologies, there is no distinct backyard character within the immediate area. Despite this, the proposed development includes a generous setback from the rear (east) boundary in the order of 5.2 metres, which allows for appropriate landscaping and separation between buildings on adjoining lots.Along the Smyth Street frontage, the proposed development presents to the street as a three-storey building with a projecting centre element. It is noted that the three storey form of the projecting fa?ade is well-recessed from side boundaries (in excess of 5.0 metres to the north and south) and where the side setbacks are reduced down the length of the site, the third storey is partially concealed within a mansard style roof, which further limits the presentation of bulk to the street. With regard to neighbourhood character, this allows the building to appear as recessive from the streetscape, minimising bulk and dominance from the public realm. Furthermore, the Second Floor level includes a terraced area with a depth of approximately 1.8 metres, which assists with the articulation of the fa?ade by adding depth and visual permeability to the fa?ade of the building above the 1.0 metre rendered balustrade.Colours and materials proposed are reflective of those found within the immediate area and include neutral tones of face brickwork, render and slate tiles.Consideration has been made to the adjoining interfaces, equitable development and landscaping opportunities onsite, to provide for a building which integrates successfully into the streetscape. More specific to landscaping, the Garden Suburban 1 precinct places a strong emphasis on ‘leafy streetscapes’ and ‘established garden surrounds’, with ‘front and side setbacks to provide space around buildings and to allow for small, well-designed gardens that contribute to the landscape quality of the street’. As described above, the proposal incorporates setbacks on all sides, with provision of deep soil planting, canopy trees and various shrubs and ground covers, consistent with the preferred neighbourhood character. It is also confirmed that the three street trees adjacent to the subject site will be retained and protected via conditions of any permit issued. Moreover, Council’s Arborist has confirmed that the proposed development is not anticipated to result in an unreasonable impact on existing neighbouring vegetation.In accordance with the above, the proposal is considered to demonstrate an appropriate response to existing and preferred neighbourhood character.Clause 55 – Two or More Dwellings on a Lot (ResCode)The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Clause 55 (including the relevant Apartment Development Standards).Built FormFront SetbackAs previously discussed within the site and surrounds section of this report, the subject site is the only allotment with a Smyth Street address. Notwithstanding this, the orientation and configuration of Smyth Street and Ashe Grove result in the site being visually prominent when viewed from Ashe Grove. The proposed front setback is assessed in detail as follows.The existing dwelling is setback 9.3 metres from Smyth Street. The depth of this setback is an anomaly in the immediate area. It is proposed to construct the residential building 4.6-6.8 metres from the Smyth Street frontage at Ground and First Floor levels, with setbacks of 4.7-5.7 metres at Second Floor level.10 Ashe Grove is located directly south of the subject site and is setback 5.6 metres from the site frontage, however the entire allotment is recessed a minimum of 11.8 metres from the front title boundary of 1 Smyth Street. In addition, the lot at 10 Ashe Grove has an angled front setback, which falls further away from the front title boundary of 1 Smyth Street, with the south-west corner of 10 Ashe Grove recessed a maximum of 23 metres from the south-west corner of 1 Smyth Street. Therefore, it is not practical to compare the depth of the proposed and adjoining front setbacks side by side.When considering the context of the immediate area, there is a pattern of front setbacks between 4.0-5.6 metres (excluding pergola/balcony encroachment) within Ashe Grove. The Objective of Standard B6 seeks to ensure ‘the setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient use of the site’. Therefore, in assessing what is considered to be an appropriate front setback for the subject site, the average depth of setbacks in the surrounding area as well as prominence of the proposed development within the streetscape should be considered. The bulk of the proposed development is positioned toward the centre of the frontage, where the minimum setback of 4.6 metres is proposed. It is important to note that where the building is setback 4.6 metres, the width of the building is only 4.7 metres (approx. 26% of the site frontage). The front setback increases to 7.0 metres at the southern side of the building frontage, which seeks to respond to the recessed front boundary associated with 10 Ashe Grove. It is noted that the proposed building is setback from the southern boundary (where it interfaces Ashe Grove directly) by 2.5 metres. The 2.5 metre setback from Ashe Grove assists in minimizing the prominence of the proposed building in the context of the position of 10 Ashe Grove. This is considered to be an acceptable outcome. To the north, the proposed basement access provides separation of the proposed building from the adjoining existing dwellings at 6-8 Tashinny Road. It is noted that the minimum setback of the proposed development at 4.6 metres, which is greater than the existing setback of the existing dwelling at 6 Tashinny Road (on the corner of Tashinny Road and Smyth Street), which at its closest point is only 0.5 metres from Smyth Street.On balance, it is considered that the proposed building responds to the complex site constraints with regard to the front setback. The proposal is reflective of the existing and preferred neighbourhood character of relatively shallow front setbacks.Site CoverageThe proposal seeks a total site coverage of 58.4%, which is below the prescribed ResCode maximum of 60%. In addition, Schedule 10 to the GRZ directs that a basement should not exceed 75% of the site area. The proposed basement (including piles) occupies 60.4% of the subject site area, therefore complies with the varied standard.Side and Rear SetbacksIt is noted that the proposed basement is concealed below ground, therefore an assessment of this level against the above provisions is not required.An assessment of the proposal at all levels from the side and rear boundaries demonstrates full compliance with the provisions of Standard B17.It is further noted that Schedule 10 to the GRZ provides the following variation to B17:For a distance of at least 5 metres behind the front facade of the building fronting the street, setback new buildings (including basements) a minimum of 2 metres from at least one side boundary and at least 1 metre from the other side boundary up to 3.6 metres in height. Where no setback is specified, standard A10 or B17 applies.The proposal adopts a minimum 2.1 metre setback from the northern boundary and 2.5 metre setback from the south, therefore it complies with the varied standard as above. Amenity ImpactsNorth-facing windowsThe southern elevation of the Second Floor is proposed to be setback 5.9 metres from the southern title boundary, where Clause 55 (ResCode) Standard B20 directs that a wall of this height opposite a north-facing habitable room window should be setback 5.6 metres, therefore the proposal demonstrates compliance with Standard B20.OvershadowingDue to the orientation of the subject site and adjoining properties, there is opportunity for the proposed development to overshadow adjoining residential land to the south (10 Ashe Grove) and to the east (8, 12 and 14 Ellerslie Place) within the prescribed timeframes of Standard B21. As such, shadowing impacts to each of these properties are described in detail as follows:South – 10 Ashe GroveFrom 9am-12pm, the shadows associated with the proposed development fall over a small section of the driveway (beyond what is cast by the boundary fence), with no additional shadows cast over the secluded private open space.At 1pm, a negligible shadow is cast past that of the fence shadow to the secluded private open space of 10 Ashe Grove. This additional shadow is in the order of 0.1 square metres in area. This shadow is increased minutely by 2pm-3pm, with an area of approximately 0.2 square metres, extending across the shadowing of the fence line.As such, it is considered that the secluded private open space to 10 Ashe Grove will not be adversely impacted upon by shadows cast by the proposed development.East – 8 Ellerslie PlaceShadows cast by the proposed development do not reach the land at 8 Ellerslie Place until 3pm, where they remain entirely within the shadows cast by the existing 1.8 metre high boundary fence. As such, the secluded provide open space of 8 Ellerslie Place will not be adversely impacted upon by shadows cast by the proposed development.East – 12 Ellerslie PlaceShadows cast by the proposed development do not reach the land at 12 Ellerslie Place until 3pm, where they protrude up to 0.3 metres past the shadow cast by the existing 1.8 metre high boundary fence. As such, the secluded provide open space of 8 Ellerslie Place will be subject to 1.6 square metres of additional shadow within the area of open space. The secluded private open space to 12 Ellerslie Place exceed 40 square metres, therefore a negligible increase can be accepted. On this basis, the proposal complies with Standard B21.South-East 14 Ellerslie PlaceIt is noted that a shadow with an area of 3 square metres is proposal to fall over the secluded private open space of 14 Ellerslie Place at 3pm, which falls entirely within the shadow cast by the existing fence and shed at 10 Ashe Grove. This shadow will not adversely impact the secluded private open space of 14 Ellerslie Place and is therefore acceptable.Overlooking Ground Floor windows are screened by fencing. All terraces are provided with fixed screens to a height of 1.7 metres from finished floor level which adequately screen views to adjoining areas of secluded private open space/habitable room windows. The majority of First Floor habitable room windows with a height of 1.7 metres from FFL are shown with an ‘O.G’ notation. Plan PD34 provides clarification of overlooking treatments which confirms OG represents ‘obscure glazing’ in accordance with Standard B22. Second Floor windows on the northern and southern elevations are shown with a sill height of 1.7 metres from FFL, which complies with the Standard.Noise (on and off-site)It is considered that the proposal has been designed to ensure services and other mechanical plant have been positioned on site (on the roof and in the basement) in order to minimise impacts on the adjoining residences.It is anticipated that general noise emitted from the site (following occupancy) will be associated with the typical use of the land for residential purposes.The proposal seeks to contain noise associated with vehicles within the basement area, the entrance to which is positioned adjacent to the secluded private open space of 6 and 8 Tashinny Road. It is noted that the Bedroom 2 window associated with Dwelling 1 (within the proposed development) is oriented to the north, with the western wall to remain solid. This assists in the protection of internal amenity within this room as it is located above the accessway to the basement.Terraces associated with the Ground Floor dwellings are setback from title boundaries where the development shares a sensitive interface, with landscaping provided to enhance privacy and to buffer noise impacts. Where terraces are located above ground, setbacks and overlooking screens assists to mitigate off-site impacts associated with residential noise (after occupation).It is considered that the design of the building generally seeks to limit off-site impacts with regard to noise, with a central lift core and services located within the basement, in accordance with the Standard.Internal AmenityDaylight to new windowsAll habitable room windows provided to each of the proposed dwellings have been designed to be oriented to an outdoor space with a minimum area of 3 square metres and minimum dimension of 1.0 metre clear to sky, in accordance with Standard B27. As such, it is considered that each habitable room has access to adequate daylight.Secluded Private Open SpaceStandard B28 directs that a balcony area should achieve a minimum area of 8sqm with a minimum dimension of 1.6 metres. It is confirmed that the terrace/balcony for each of the ground level dwellings (Dwellings 1 and 2) achieves this minimum requirement. Each of the dwellings above ground (3, 4 and 5) are provided with a total area of balcony/terrace of a minimum 13.5sqm and minimum depth of 2.4 metres in accordance with the Standard B43 (Private open space above Ground Floor). All spaces are accessible via internal living rooms, are of an appropriate layout and are screened from the elements in order to maintain usability.Solar access to Open SpaceThe majority of open space areas associated with the development are positioned on the eastern and western elevations, with the ability to gain northern-solar access, with the exception of a balcony associated with Dwelling 3 of the First Floor. The balcony associated with Dwelling 3 is positioned on the southern elevation, at the south-west corner of the building. With a depth of 2.7 metres adjacent to a proposed wall height of 3.7 metres, the proposal fall short of Standard B29 by 2.6 metres (5.3 metres required to meet the Standard). Despite this shortfall, it is considered that as the proposed balcony is dual aspect with combined southern and western orientation, it is contended that the proposal meets the objective in that the space is able to gain sufficient solar access from the west.StorageStandard B44 requires that each of the three bedroom dwellings are to be provided with a total of 18 cubic metres of storage, 12 cubic metres of which must be located within the dwelling. Areas of storage to each dwelling are provided within the basement, however the proposed plans do not include dimensions/area of internal storage provided to each dwelling. As such, a condition of any approval granted will require that storage provision equating to a total of 18 cubic metres (minimum 12 cubic metres internal to each dwelling) in accordance with Standard B44 must be notated on the relevant site plans.Front fencingStandard B32 directs that front fencing (in accordance with the requirements of the Schedule to the Zone) adjacent to a road other than a Category 1 Road Zone be up to 1.5 metres in height.The proposal seeks to construct a front fence with rendered piers and iron pickets to Smyth Street and Ashe Grove, with a height of between 1.6-2.0 metres. It is noted that the section of the fence 2.0 metres in height is located adjacent to the basement entry, to the northern end of the site frontage. The variance in height is proposed due to the slope of the land.It is noted that the Ashe Grove frontage is currently fenced with a 1.9 metre solid timber paling fence. It is proposed to construct the front fence along the Ashe Grove frontage to a height of 1.6 metres, however elevation details of this fence have not been provided. The provision of a 1.6 metre fence in this location is acceptable as it will provide visual permeability to the pedestrian walkway and entry behind. Elevation details of the Ashe Grove front fencing will be required (including details of tree root protection during construction) via a condition of any approval granted.ServicesThe proposed service facilities are to be located within the Basement and will not impact the streetscape or adjoining residential interfaces. It is noted that the provision of services within the Basement includes structures/plant associated with heating and cooling units.Mailboxes do not appear on the proposed sight plans. This will be required to be shown in accordance with Standard B34 as a condition of any approval granted.Car Parking and TrafficThe application has a car parking requirement of 10 residential spaces. The proposal seeks to provide a total of 11 spaces, therefore the proposal is compliant with on-site car parking provision.It is noted that as the subject site is located within 400 metres of the Principal Public Transport Network, there is no Planning Scheme requirement for the provision of a dedicated on-site visitor car parking space.Council's Transport and Parking Department have reviewed the provision of parking and the layout and access arrangements of the basement, and are generally supportive of the proposal subject to conditions regarding confirmation of access for a B99 vehicle via the submission of swept path diagrams. In addition, Transport and Parking have noted that traffic generation as a result of the proposal is considered satisfactory and is unlikely to have a significant impact on the operation of the surrounding road network.LandscapingThe proposed development seeks to provide deep soil planting opportunities for trees within the Smyth street frontage as well as within the north-east corner (rear) of the site. In addition, the proposal provides opportunity for perimeter landscaping around the entire site. It is noted that a section of the Basement is to be constructed to the northern title boundary for a length of 10 metres (including piles). It is considered that this length of wall constructed to the boundary is unneccesary and should be setback 1.0 metre, in line with the basement entry ramp. It is noted that the setback of the basement from the northern boundary will not adversely impact the required minimum dimension for car parking spaces or movements within the basement. As such, the 1.0 setback of the 10.0 metre length of wall will be required via a condition of any approval granted. Despite the 1.0 metre setback of the basement as described above, in order to provide a more meaningful landscaping response which isn’t limited to a width of 1.0 metre, the ground floor above includes a raised planters along the northern boundary in the location of the basement. This ensures landscaping is included along the length of the northern boundary, opposite the windows of Bedrooms 1 and 2 to Dwelling 1 and is an acceptable outcome. It is noted that the northern elevation does not include details of the proposed planters or fencing therefore a condition will be included on any permit issued requiring this detail be shown.There are no significant trees located on the subject site, as confirmed with the submission of an Arborist report, detailing all existing trees to be removed from the subject site. All existing trees/vegetation is to be removed from the subject site.It is noted that the existing and preferred neighbourhood character of the area places an emphasis on landscaping. The proposal seeks to provide an acceptable level of canopy tree, shrubs and ground cover planting, to enable softening of the appearance of hard surface and to assist the integration of the building into the neighbourhood. In addition, with appropriate maintenance, the proposed landscaping will provide a safe, functional and attractive environment. Council’s Arborist has indicated that the proposed landscaping plan is an appropriate response.As previously discussed, there are three street trees adjacent to the subject site, all of which are proposed to be retained. Council’s Arborist has independently assessed the potential impacts of the development on these trees and has concluded that they can and must be retained, with a Tree Management Plan to be included as a permit of any approval granted.It is noted that Schedule 10 to the GRZ provides a variation to Standard B13, which seeks to include the planting of an additional canopy tree. Standard B38 (Deep Soil Planting) provides the minimum area required for deeps soil planting, with a minimum of two trees required. It is noted that in addition to the two deep soil canopy trees, the landscaping plan includes two additional small-medium sized canopy trees (Biloxi Crepe Myrtle and Greenback Bull Bay Magnolia) to the north-west and south-east corners of the site. Therefore, the revised standard has been achieved.With regard to Standard B38 (Deep Soil areas and Canopy Trees), the subject site is approximately 837 square metres in area, therefore in accordance with table B5 of the Standard, 5% of the site area (with a minimum dimension of 3.0 metres) should be set aside for deep soil planting, with 1 small tree per 30 square metres of deep soil.The proposal incorporates two areas of dedicated deep soil, one within the site frontage to Smyth Street with dimensions of 3.0 x 8.0 metres (24sqm) and one to the north-east with dimensions of 3.5 x 5.2 metres (18.5sqm). These combined areas equate to 5% of the total site area, in accordance with the Standard.Each of the deep soil planting areas has been provided with a canopy tree (Bull Bay Magnolia within frontage and Pin Oak within the north-east corner) demonstrated on the submitted landscape plan.Council’s Arborist has reviewed the submitted landscaping plan and has indicated support, subject to standard conditions.It is noted that the deep soil planting area proposed within the frontage of the site is partially obstructed at Ground Level by paving associated with the terrace to Dwelling 1. In order to maximise the potential efficiency of the designated deep soil planting area, a condition of any approval granted will require the paving associated with the Dwelling 1 terrace (in the location of the deep soil planting area as a minimum) to be permeable, to the satisfaction of Council.Environmentally Sustainable DesignThe Applicant has submitted a Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA) in response to the application requirements of Clause 22.05-4. The SDA uses the BESS tool to demonstrate that the objectives of Clause 22.05 have been addressed.The BESS score achieved for the development is 50%, with a minimum of 50% scored within four required categories of Water (57%), Energy (52%), Stormwater (100%) and IEQ (63%). This score meets best practice and demonstrates the proposal adequately responds to the ESD objectives ofClause 22.05.Stormwater ManagementThe submitted Sustainable Design Assessment submitted with the application included a WaterSensitive Urban Design Response as well as a STORM Rating Report. The submitted STORMReport achieved a rating of 100%. This meets the minimum requirement to satisfy Clause 22.18.In addition to this, the proposal includes water tanks located within the basement. The submitted SDA indicates that the water tanks are to be connected to toilets within the development, however a condition of any approval granted will require a notation to this effect on the Basement plan.ObjectionsIn response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following comments are made:Loss of viewsThere are no provisions contained within the Stonnington Planning Scheme which provide direction on the protection of views. Therefore, this is not a relevant planning consideration.Impacts during constructionIt is noted that impacts during construction are managed via the Building Permit process and as such, is not a relevant planning consideration.Loss of surrounding property valueLoss of property value in association with an application for development is not a relevant planning consideration.Human Rights ConsiderationThis application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State Government and which complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.ConclusionHaving assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended that the proposal be supported for the following reasons:?The application is consistent with State and Local Planning Policy that seeks to provide for well-designed medium-density residential development that respects neighbourhood character in established urban areas.?The proposal provides for a satisfactory landscape response that will contribute to the landscape character of the area.?The development will not unreasonably impact upon adjoining amenity as determined by compliance with ResCode (Clause 55) Objectives.?The proposal satisfies Council's Environmental Sustainable Development and Stormwater Management policies.Attachments1.PA - 979-18 - 1 Smyth Street Toorak - Attachment 1 of 1Plans RECOMMENDATIONThat a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 979/18 for the land located at 1 Smyth Street Toorak be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for the construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential Zone subject to the following conditions:1.Before the commencement of the development, one (1) copy of plans drawn to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans Council date stamped 22 March 2019 prepared by Christopher Doyle Architects but modified to show:a)Elevation details of the proposed fencing to the Ashe Grove frontage, including details of construction methods to protect the English Oak (Tree 2) within the street reserve abutting the Ashe Grove site boundary;b)The provision of mailboxes in accordance with ResCode Standard B34 (Clause 55) of the Stonnington Planning Scheme;c)The provision of storage facilities equating to a total of 18 cubic metres for each dwelling (minimum 12 cubic metres internal for each dwelling) in accordance with ResCode Standard B44 (Clause 55) of the Stonnington Planning Scheme;d)A detailed swept path analysis demonstrating how access and egress can be achieved for a B99 vehicle;e)The paving associated with the Dwelling 1 terrace at Ground Level (in the location of the designated deep soil planting area as a minimum) to be permeable;f)The northern wall of the Basement for a length of 10 metres from the basement ramp is to be setback a minimum of 1.0 metre from the northern title boundary;g)The northern elevation to include relevant details regarding the proposed raised planters and boundary fencing;h)A Landscape Plan in accordance with Condition 3;i)A Tree Management Plan in accordance with Condition 5;j)A Waste Management Plan in accordance with Condition 12; andk)A Sustainable Design Assessment in accordance with Condition 13.All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.2.The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.3.Before the development starts, a landscape plan to be prepared by a landscape architect or suitably qualified or experienced landscape designer, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The landscape plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The landscape plan must be in accordance with the landscape concept plan dated 22 March 2019 prepared by John Patrick but modified to show:a)A survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removedb)Buildings and trees (including botanical names) on neighbouring properties within three metres of the boundaryc)Details of surface finishes of pathways and drivewaysd)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 plante)Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the sitef)The extent of any cut, fill, embankments or retaining walls associated with the landscape treatment of the siteg)Details of all proposed hard surface materials including pathways, patio or decked areas.4.Before the occupation of the development, the landscaping works as shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced. 5.Concurrent with the endorsement of development plans a Tree Management Plan prepared by a suitably qualified arborist must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the Tree Management Plan will form part of this permit and all works must be done in accordance with the tree management plan.The Tree Management Plan must detail measures to protect and ensure the viability of the existing street tree within the Ashe Grove frontage (English Oak - Tree 2), the two existing street trees within the frontage to Smyth Street (2 x Pin Oaks - Trees 3 and 4, as well as all existing trees on adjoining properties as identified in the submitted Arborist report prepared by John Patrick, Council date stamped 27 September 2018. Without limiting the generality of the Tree Management Plan it must include the following details and specifications:a)Pre-construction (including demolition) – details to include a tree protection zone, height barrier around the tree protection zone, amount and type of mulch to be placed above the tree protection zone, method of cutting any roots or branches which extend beyond the tree protection zone, boundary fence materials and construction method as well as Site Arborist’s qualifications and site inspection regime.b)During-construction – details to include watering regime during construction and method of protection of exposed roots. Street tree root disturbance must be kept to a minimum.c)Post-construction – details to include watering regime and time of final inspection when barrier can be removed and protection works and regime can cease.d)The outside the Alignment of the Basement where the building is within the Tree Protection Zone for Tree 2 (English Oak), the Ground Floor and all associated sub-flooring (suspended slab) must be built above grade supported by screw piles.Pre-construction works and any root cutting must be inspected and approved by the Parks Unit. Removal of protection works and cessation of the tree management plan must be authorised by the Parks Unit.6.Before the development (including excavation and demolition) starts, a tree protection fence must be erected around all trees referenced within Condition 5. Fencing is to be compliant with Section 4 of AS 4970.7.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.8.Prior to the endorsement of plans and prior to any development commencing on the site (including demolition and excavation whether or not a planning permit is required), the owner/ developer must enter into a Deed with the Responsible Authority and provide it with a bank guarantee of $21,085 as security against a failure to protect the health of the Quercus robur (English Oak – Tree 2) to be retained. The applicant must meet all costs associated with drafting and execution of the Deed, including those incurred by the responsible authority. Once a period of 12 months has lapsed following the completion of all works at the site the Responsible Authority may discharge the bank guarantee upon the written request of the obligor. At that time, the Responsible Authority will inspect the tree and, provided they have not been detrimentally affected, the bank guarantee will be discharged.9.Concurrent with the endorsement of plans or prior to the commencement of any works at the site (including demolition and excavation whether or not a planning permit is required), whichever occurs sooner, a letter of engagement must be provided to the Responsible Authority from the project arborist selected to oversee all relevant tree protection works. The project arborist must be an appropriately experienced and qualified professional (minimum Cert IV or equivalent in experience).10.The project arborist must maintain a log book detailing all site visits. The log book must be made available to the Responsible Authority within 24 hours of any request. 11.Prior to the commencement of any works at the site (including demolition and excavation whether or not a planning permit is required), the project arborist must advise the Responsible Authority in writing that the Tree Protection Fences have been installed to their satisfaction.12.Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a Waste Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The Waste Management Plan must include:a)Dimensions of waste areasb)The number of bins to be providedc)Method of waste and recyclables collectiond)Hours of waste and recyclables collection e)Method of presentation of bins for waste collectionf)Sufficient headroom within the basement to allow the passage of waste collection vehicles (where applicable)g)Sufficient turning circles for the waste collection vehicles to drive out in forward gear from within the basement (where applicable)h)Strategies for how the generation of waste and recyclables from the development will be minimisedWhen approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. Waste collection from the development must be in accordance with the plan, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 13.Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA) report must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Upon approval the SDA report will be endorsed as part of the planning permit and the development must incorporate the sustainable design initiatives outlined in the SDA to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The SDA must be generally in accordance with the report prepared by F2 Design, Council date stamped 27 September 2018, updated in accordance with the development plans Council date stamped 22 March 2019 modified to:a)Demonstrate how Best Practice measures from each of the 10 key Sustainable Design Categories of Stonnington Council's Sustainable Design Assessment in the Planning Process (SDAPP) have been addressed.b)Demonstrates how the policy objectives of Clause 22.18 are achieved, including details on plans of how each impervious area is treated, and that all toilets and the irrigation system are connected to the water tank.14.All works must be undertaken in accordance with the endorsed Sustainable Design Assessment to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. No alterations to the Sustainable Design Assessment may occur without written consent of the Responsible Authority.15.Prior to the occupation of the building, fixed privacy screens (not adhesive film) designed to limit overlooking as required by Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 in accordance with the endorsed plans must be installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority thereafter for the life of the building.16.Prior to a building permit being issued, a report for the legal point of discharge must be obtained from Council and a drainage design for the development must be prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer in accordance with all ‘recommendations’ and requirements contained in that report. All drainage must be by means of a gravity based system with the exception of runoff from any basement ramp and agricultural drains which may be pumped. The relevant building surveyor must check and approve the drainage design and ensure that protection of the building is provided from a 1 in 100 A.R.I. rainfall event as required by the Building Regulations. (Please do not state drainage design to satisfaction of Council, that is the responsibility of the relevant building surveyor to check and approve in accordance with the report and ‘recommendations’ for the legal point of discharge).17.Prior to an ‘Occupancy Permit’ being issued, a suitably qualified Engineer must carry out a detailed inspection of the completed stormwater drainage system and associated works including all water storage tanks and detention (if applicable) to ensure that all works have been constructed in accordance with the approved design and the relevant planning permit conditions. Certification of the completed drainage from the Engineer must be provided to Council prior to a ‘Statement of Compliance’ being issued for the subdivision.18.The existing footpath levels must not be lowered or altered in any way at the property line (to facilitate the basement ramp). This is required to ensure that normal overland flow from the street is not able to enter the basement due to any lowering of the footpath at the property line.19.The redundant vehicular crossing must be removed and the footpath, naturestrip and kerb reinstated at the owner’s cost to the satisfaction of Council.20.The crossover must be constructed to Council’s Standard Vehicle Crossover Guidelines unless otherwise approved by the Responsible Authority. Separate consent for crossovers is required from Council’s Building and Local Law Unit.21.The applicant must at their cost provide a stormwater detention system to restrict runoff from the development to no greater than the existing runoff based on a 1 in 10 A.R.I. to the satisfaction of Council’s Infrastructure Unit. Alternatively, in lieu of the stand-alone detention system, the owner may provide stormwater tanks that are in total 3,000 litres greater than those tanks required to satisfy WSUD requirements for the development. Those tanks must be connected to all toilets. 22.Any poles, service pits or other structures/features on the footpath required to be relocated to facilitate the development must be done so at the cost of the owner/applicant and subject to the relevant authority's consent.23.All utility services to the subject land and buildings approved as part of this permit must be provided underground to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority by completion of the development.24.All plant and equipment (including air-conditioning units) shall be located or screened so as not to be visible from any of the surrounding footpaths and adjoining properties (including from above) and shall be baffled so as to minimise the emission of unreasonable noise to the environment in accordance with Section 48A of the Environment Protection Act 1970 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.25.Adequate provision must be made for the storage and collection of wastes and recyclables within the site prior to the commencement of use or occupation of the building. This area must be appropriately graded, drained and screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.26.Prior to occupation, access for persons with disabilities must be provided in compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and such access must be maintained at all times the building is occupied or in use. 27.This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:a)The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.b)The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.NOTES:A.This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are obtained.B.Nothing in this permit hereby issued shall be construed to allow the removal of, damage to or pruning of a significant tree (including the roots) without the further written approval of Council."Significant tree" means a tree:a)with a trunk circumference of 180 centimetres or greater measured at its base; orb)with a trunk circumference of 140 centimetres or greater measured at 1.5 metres above its base; orc)listed on the Significant Tree Register.Please contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 to ascertain if permission is required for tree removal or pruning or for further information and protection of trees during construction works.C.Nothing in the permit hereby issued may be construed to allow the removal of, damage to or pruning of any street tree without the further written consent of the Stonnington City Council. Contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 for further information.D.The owners and occupiers of the dwellings hereby approved are not eligible to receive "Resident Parking Permits". E.At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 stated that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing within the following timeframes:i.Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed by the permit has not yet started; andii.Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires. 2.Planning Application 1209/18 - 45 Argo Street, South Yarra - Extension of a dwelling in a Neighbourhood Residential ZoneActing Manager Statutory Planning: Hannah McBride-Burgess General Manager Planning & Amenity: Stuart Draffin PurposeFor Council to consider a planning application for the extension of a dwelling on a lot less than 500sqm in a Neighbourhood Residential Zone at 45 Argo Street, South Yarra.Executive SummaryApplicant:DWH Aitken and Associates P/LWard:NorthZone:Neighbourhood Residential Zone – Schedule 3 (Inner Urban Precincts)Overlay:Special Building OverlayNeighbourhood Precinct: Inner Urban PrecinctDate lodged:28 November 2018Statutory days: (as at council meeting date)70 Trigger for referral to Council:Councillor Call UpCultural Heritage PlanNoNumber of objections:ThreeConsultative Meeting:No Officer Recommendation:Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit BackgroundThe ProposalThe plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by DWH Airken & Associates Pty Ltd and are known as Drawing No.s: TP1-13 to TP13-13 Revision B with Council date stamp of 17 January 2019. Key features of the proposal are:?Internal demolition of the dwelling, and demolition of the roof north of the existing chimney (no permit required).?Reconstruction of the ground floor, including ‘filling in’ the court yard adjoining the eastern boundary of the site. Construction of a new verandah at the north end of the dwelling.?Construction of a new first floor level to match the footprint of the ground floor, including a north facing balcony over the ground level verandah.?The proposed dwelling has three bedrooms. No car parking is to be provided on the site (in keeping with the existing conditions).?The development proposes site coverage of 73.1% and permeability of 24.3%.?The proposed first floor has a maximum height of 6.72m. It sits below the height of the existing chimney (to be retained).Site and SurroundsThe site is located on the north side of Argo Street, approximately 15m west of Tyrone Street, South Yarra. The site has the following significant characteristics:?A frontage to Tyrone Street of 5.06m, a depth of approximately 30.43m and an overall site area of 154sqm.?The site is developed with a single storey, attached dwelling. The dwelling is setback from Argo Street by 2.76m and from its rear boundary by around 6.6m. It also has a central light court adjoining the site’s eastern boundary.?The existing dwelling has two bedrooms. No vehicular car parking is provided on the site.?The site is generally flat.The site is located within a residential area, which exhibits fairly intense development of between one and three storeys. The site has an immediate relationship to the following properties:?To the east the site abuts 47 Argo Street, which is developed with a single storey, attached dwelling. The length of the dwelling at No. 47 corresponds to the length of the dwelling on the subject site, and it has no windows orientated towards the site. On the roof of the dwelling there are skylights nearby the common boundary. At the north end of the dwelling there is an area of private and secluded open space.?To the west of the site is 43 Argo Street. This property is also developed with a single storey attached dwelling. The rear part of this dwelling sits under a common roofline with the dwelling at the site. It has no windows orientated towards the site. There is an area of private and secluded open space to the north of the dwelling.?Immediately north of the site, there is a ROW which is around 1.5m wide. This land is currently accessed by a gate from Tyrone Street. North of the ROW, at 41 Tyrone Street there is a detached single storey dwelling with large rear extension. The immediate interface at this dwelling is blank wall adjoining the ROW.Previous Planning Application(s)A search of Council records indicates that the site has no relevant planning history.The TitleThe site is described on Certificate of Title Volume 10113 Folio 603.No covenants affect the land. There are party wall easement extending partway along both side boundaries.Planning ControlsThe following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:ZoneClause 32.09 – Neighbourhood Residential ZonePursuant to Clause 32.09-2 a permit is not required to use the land for dwelling.Pursuant to Clause 32.09-4 an application to construct or extend a dwelling or residential building must provide a minimum garden area. Given the subject site is less than 400sqm in size, there is no requirement to provide a minimum garden area. Pursuant to Clause 32.09-5 a permit is required to construct or extend one dwelling on a lot less than 500sqm. A development must meet the requirements of Clause 54.Pursuant to Clause 32.09-10 a building must not be constructed for use as a dwelling or residential building that exceeds a building height of 9m or contains more than two storeys.OverlayClause 44.05 – Special Building Overlay Pursuant to Clause 440.5-2 a permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry out works. The Special Building Overlay (SBO) only affects a small portion of land at the front of the site. No works are proposed within this area of the site. The existing front fence is to be retained and there are no changes to levels evident from the plans. A permit is therefore not required under the SBO.Particular ProvisionsClause 52.06 Car ParkingPursuant to Clause 52.06-1, Clause 52.06 does not apply to the extension of one dwelling on a lot in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone. There is therefore no requirement to provide car parking in association with this development. Relevant Planning PoliciesClause 15 Built Environment and HeritageClause 21.02OverviewClause 21.03VisionClause 21.05HousingClause 21.06Built Environment and HeritageClause 22.18Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design)Clause 22.23Neighbourhood Character PolicyAdvertisingThe application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. In February 2019 notices were sent to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land. In March 2019 further notice took place in the form of placing one sign on the site for a period of 14 days. The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily.The site is located in North Ward and objections from three different properties have been received.The grounds for objection are summarized below: ?Overdevelopment?Existing row of single storey dwellings with chimneys should be protected?Overlooking adjacent and opposite properties ?Loss of sunlight?Loss of daylight (including to skylights at 47 Argo Street)?Increase noise transferal though thin common walls?Impacts from flooding?Concern about potential infringement into adjoining ROWKEY ISSUESThe permit applicant proposes to carry out an extension to an existing dwelling on a lot which is less than 500sqm in size. The subject dwelling is part of a row of attached, single storey cottages in Argo Street, South Yarra. While being of an older style however, these dwelling are not of heritage significance (they are not currently or proposed to be subject to a Heritage Overlay). They are located in a mixed context where there are numerous building styles present, fairly equally spread between one and two storey scales. When properties are either redeveloped or extended it is most often with two levels of accommodation since lots are relatively small in this context, and land values high. Even if the site was covered by a Heritage Overlay though, that would not preclude the possibility of a two level development.The primary issues to consider in this assessment are neighbourhood character and amenity. These issues are discussed below.Neighbourhood CharacterThe permit applicant seeks to retain the existing frontage of the dwelling, as well as the front portion of roofing and the chimney. The first floor extension is sited immediately behind the chimney, and sits below the maximum height of the chimney. The top of the extension sits around 1.3m above the height of the existing dwelling’s roofline. There are no changes proposed within the fa?ade, front fence or site’s frontage treatments. The neighbourhood character implications of this proposal therefore are limited.Pursuant to Clause 22.23 (Neighbourhood Character Policy), the site is located within the Inner Urban Precinct, where the following Statement of Preferred Neighbourhood Character applies: The Inner Urban (IU) character precinct is defined by buildings of innovative and high quality architectural styles that sit comfortably within compact streetscapes of Victorian, Edwardian and Interwar dwellings. Consistent front setbacks reinforce the building edge along the streets, and building heights and forms complement, rather than dominate, the rhythm of development. Well-designed gardens for small spaces contribute to the softening of the streetscape. Low or permeable front fences provide views of building facades and front gardens. Where present, car parking structures are located at the rear of buildings with access from rear lanes to provide continuous, uninterrupted footpaths for pedestrian friendly streets. Areas within a Residential Growth or Mixed Use Zone or within a substantial change area will accommodate more development within a more compact setting but with space for vegetation and high quality, responsive design.As noted already, the permit applicant is not obligated to retain the existing dwelling however, by doing so, the proposal responds to the desire to retain older style dwellings in this area where they contribute to the local character. The proposed two storey scale of the building is consistent with the scale of other buildings observed in this area, and below the 9.0m maximum permitted by the NRZ3. The extension does not therefore dominate the streetscape. It provides a one storey scale transition to adjoining buildings which is not uncommon in most locations. The south elevation of the new first floor includes three new south facing windows. The windows pick up the vertical detailing of the host building and sit comfortably within the fa?ade.There is concern however, that the chimney to be retained will be crowded by the design, which builds immediately up to its northern edge. Given the chimney is to be retained (which is supported) it should be better respected by the design. A permit condition therefore should be imposed which requires a setback between the chimney and the new extension. This issue has been discussed with the permit applicant who has agreed to a 200mm separation, and requested that the step be removed from the southern fa?ade by align the proposed southern wall of the first floor. This change would result in the western half of the proposed fa?ade being moved forward (south) by approximately 190mm. Usually a reduction in setback would be advertised to adjacent neighbours however, in the case, the change is small and the relevant section of building abuts the roofline of the adjacent property. It is also well setback from Argo Street. These changes will not cause material detriment and moreover, are considered to result in an appropriate planning outcome. In particular, the consistent street setback will simplify the fa?ade and better highlight the existing chimney. These changes can be affected by permit conditions. The proposed site coverage (at 73.1%) is greater than specified by the standard of Clause 55 (of 60%). The proposed increase in site coverage is attributable only to the verandah / balcony, and thus relatively constrained. From a neighbourhood character perspective the additional site coverage is supportable in this highly developed context. The amenity consequences of this and other aspects of the design are considered below.Amenity ConditionsThe existing alignment of the dwelling replicates the length of both abutting dwellings and accordingly there will be some amenity related consequences of extending the dwelling further towards the north (through the construction of the verandah / balcony structure). The key matters to consider in an assessment of amenity are discussed below.Visual BulkThe primary means of considering a proposal’s visual impacts is by consideration against Standards A10 (Side and Rear Setback) and A11 (Walls on Boundaries) of Clause 54.The proposal includes new, two storey walls on the east and west boundaries of the site associated with the new verandah / balcony. These features are fully enclosed at the sides and the balcony is roofed. They present as solid walls on the boundary, which are 6.65m high. The structure does not accord with Clause 54, and has an immediate relationship to sensitive areas of open space at the rear of No.’s 43 and 47 Argo Street.At present the row of attached dwellings between 37-51 Argo Street are all single storey in height, and at their northern ends, there is a fairly consistent row of private and secluded open space. The dwelling at 41 Tyrone Street (to the rear of the subject site) is also a single level. These features do not preclude new development at the rear of properties however, it is considered to be particularly important that any such development adheres to standards of Clause 54. To achieve Standard A10, and also provide a useable balcony area, the walls and roofing of the balcony will most likely need to be deleted and the edges of the balcony inset from both side boundaries. The edges of the balcony will still need to be screened to a minimum height of 1.7m in order to protect the privacy experienced in neighbouring properties however, this screening should also fall within the envelope specified by Standard A10. Compliance with Standard A10 should be required by a condition of permit.It is acknowledged that this change will reduce the amenity of the balcony itself, however, this is considered to be an appropriate outcome since it provides a secondary outdoor area, which is accessible only from a bedroom. The feature is not an essential part of the design and it should not unreasonably impact upon the site’s neighbours.The proposal cannot achieve Standard A11 on the basis of the length of the existing boundary walls. Furthermore, given the ceiling height of the existing ground floor, even with setting back the balcony, the remaining wall on boundary (associated with the verandah) would exceed an average height of 3.2m. The side walls associated with the verandah should therefore be deleted – and permit conditions are recommended to this effect. Overlooking The proposed first floor balcony is currently provided with adequate screening to comply with Standard A15 which will prevent unreasonable overlooking to the east, north and west. As noted above, adequate screening of the balcony must be maintained.It is noted that the owner / occupant of 50 Argo Street has raised an objection in respect to overlooking from the proposed south facing windows into this dwellings’ north facing open space and windows. The proposed windows overlook Argo Street and are situated in excess of 16m away from the property at 50 Argo Street. Pursuant to Standard A15, views only need to be screened when within 9m. Furthermore, the relevant windows serve a hallway and a bedroom. A hallway is not a habitable room and would not usually be screened even when within a distance of 9.0m from an existing sensitive area. The proposed bedroom windows are located at an angle to 50 Argo Street, and will facilitate little viewing. It is considered that there is no need therefore to screen these south facing windows.OvershadowingShadow diagrams have been submitted by the permit applicant for the hours of 9am, 12noon and 3pm at the equinox, in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Scheme. The shadow diagrams indicate that there will be no additional overshadowing of adjacent properties owing to this application, since new shadow will fall within existing shadowing. By virtue of the modifications described above, the levels of shadowing would also be further reduced.Daylight issues There are no windows orientated towards the site on adjoining lots which would be impacted by this proposal.There are several skylights on the roof of 47 Argo Street. The Planning Scheme does not provide specific protection for skylights, although in the case of windows it seeks to retain a light court with a minimum dimension of 1m. This requirement however, only applies where a new wall is proposed immediately opposite the window. The skylights face the sky and receive daylight from a source which is clear to the sky – the proposal does not impact this arrangement. It is noted however, that the skylights’ access to sunlight, may be altered by this proposal in the afternoon. This outcome is not considered to be unreasonable however, since it is only outdoor areas and north facing windows where the Planning Scheme specifically protects solar access. The daylight implications of this proposal are considered to be reasonable.Internal AmenityThe proposal presents a satisfactorily designed dwelling, with living areas at ground floor (including one bedroom / study) and two bedrooms above. The living room benefits from a northern orientation and direct access to the primary area of private and secluded open space. This outdoor areas measures 33.62sqm, and there is a total of 47.63sqm of private open space at the site (plus the first floor balcony).The kitchen at the rear of the living room receives secondary lighting from a glass ceiling / floor above and roof top skylight. There is also a skylight above the entry to the stairs. These features will improve the energy efficiency of the dwelling. The bedrooms all have immediate daylight access. Overall matters regarding internal amenity are adequately resolved. Water Sensitive Urban DesignClause 22.18 applies to new buildings and to extensions to existing buildings which are at least 50sqm in floor area. The proposed extension is around 50sqm in size however, outside of the verandah and balcony (which are now to be significantly reduced), is sited above the existing dwelling, where there is no impact upon ground level surfaces. The subject site is small and present high existing site coverage and impermeable surfaces. There is limited opportunity to provide a response to Council’s WSUD policy, particularly without going to extensive cost. In this case it is therefore considered reasonable to waiver the usual requirement for a WSUD response.ObjectionsIn response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following comments are made:?The proposal constitutes a single dwelling, and it is not expected to produce a level of noise which would be unreasonable for a residential context. Any potential attenuation issues associate with the existing building structure are outside the realm of town planning. ?Only the front of the site is susceptible to flooding. No works are proposed within this area of the site, and the proposal therefore will have no impact upon the local flood conditions.?The plans do not show any building works within the adjoining ROW. Issues regarding construction access to the property are outside the realm of town planning and will be dealt with during the building permit process.Human Rights ConsiderationThis application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State Government and which complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.ConclusionHaving assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended that the proposal be supported for the following reasons:?The dwelling extension presents an appropriate response to the neighbourhood character.?With conditions, the proposal will not unreasonably impact upon the site’s neighbours.Attachments1.PA - 1209-18 - 45 Argo Street South Yarra - Attachments 1 of 1Plans RECOMMENDATIONThat a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 1209/18 for the land located at 45 Argo Street, South Yarra be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for the extension of a dwelling on a lot less than 500sqm in a Neighbourhood Residential Zone subject to the following conditions:1.Before the commencement of the development, 1 copy of plans drawn to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the advertised plans but modified to show:a)Modification of the proposed balcony to achieve compliance with Standards A10 (Side and Rear Setbacks) of Clause 54 (screening to accord with Standard A15 (Overlooking) must be maintained).b)Deletion of the walls on boundaries which project north of the alignment of the existing dwelling. c)Remove the step in the alignment of the south fa?ade of the first floor to create a consistent south setback, which is at least 200mm north of the chimney to be retained (this change allows the south setback of the western half of the south fa?ade to be reduced provided it is a minimum of 200mm north of the alignment of the chimney).d)The Proposed East and West Elevations correctly labelled. 2.The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason, without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.3.Prior to the occupation of the building/ commencement of use, the walls on the boundary of any adjoining properties must be cleaned and finished to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 4.All plant and equipment (including air-conditioning units) shall be located or screened so as not to be visible from any of the surrounding footpaths and adjoining properties (including from above) and shall be baffled so as to minimise the emission of unreasonable noise to the environment in accordance with Section 48A of the Environment Protection Act 1970 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 5.This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: a)The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit. b)The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit. In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.NOTES:I.At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 stated that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing within the following timeframes:i.Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed by the permit has not yet started; and ii.Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.II.This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are obtained. 3.Delivery of Stage one of the Toorak Park and Victory Square Masterplan Acting Manager Urban & Infrastructure Projects: Simon McKenzie - McHarg Acting General Manager Assets & Services: Rick Kwasek PurposeTo provide Council with an update on the community engagement process undertaken for the implementation of the first stage of the Toorak Park Masterplan, Victory Square play space and landscape improvements, and to seek endorsement on the final scope prior to commencing construction. BackgroundCouncil previously considered a report on the Toorak Park and Victory Square Masterplan which was adopted on 3 December, 2018. The report summarised feedback on the proposed masterplan consultation process and presented a masterplan which responded to feedback received. Below is a summary of the feedback as part of the earlier report.Of the 358 responses received to the online survey:?55% believed the Master Plan proposes the right balance and scope of improvements and a further 33% believed the Master Plan sets the right direction for Toorak Park and Victory Square.?67% identified that they would only make minor changes to the Draft Master Plan and a further 22% said they would not make any changes to the Draft Master Plan.?76% identified that they would visit Toorak Park or Victory Square more often if the Draft Master Plan was implemented.?62% identified that they were very satisfied and a further 24% said they were satisfied with the Draft Master Plan. ?A total of 89% of respondents endorsed the proposed Draft Master Plan.Victory SquareFeedback received from community submissions and drop-in sessions identified the need to maintain Victory Square as an improved yet not over-developed space, where dogs are allowed to be off-leash.Support was expressed for improvements and expansion of the playground area, as well as a new range of equipment that appealed to a broader range of ages.Across all forms of consultation and community engagement, elements that were not well supported within Victory Square included:?Lack of fencing to provide a fenced dog park area?The location of the proposed barbeque and shelter at the Ashleigh Street entry?Removal of existing trees and screen planting along the northern side?Provision of a path and access gate into 590 Orrong Road.Final MasterplanIn response to consultation feedback, the final masterplan (refer attachment 1) included the following changes:?Enhanced security and lighting throughout the site and provision of additional user amenities including drinking and dog water fountains?Revised pathway design in Victory Square to lessen the overall encroachment on open space?Moving the ball catch nets closer to Toorak Park thereby minimising the loss of open space in Victory Square?Creating a raised retaining / seating wall to help secure dogs within Victory Square without the need for fences and gates?Retention of the existing trees within Victory Square?Relocation of the barbeque and shelter from the Ashleigh Road entry to the northern end of the playground?Expanding the footprint of the existing playground in Victory Square and ensuring it provides for a broader age group?Consideration for the inclusion of additional recreational infrastructure such as a basketball/netball ring and a tennis hit-up wall within the cricket practice net area?Reshaping the mound that separates Toorak Park and Victory Square?Adding an additional level of terracing around the sportsground to accommodate further reshaping of the spectator mounds and minimise the need to dispose of excess soil off-site. The final adopted masterplan, incorporated the above changes, along with the deliverable to provide ‘new accessible playground and picnic area with BBQ and shelter to be located along the Ashleigh Road boundary of Victory Square’ (Objective 2, Toorak Park Masterplan, page 2). Following Council adoption, further design documentation, was developed for Victory Square in accordance with the masterplan. DiscussionDraft Victory Square Concept Plan Due to the relatively broad level of detail provided within the Masterplan, Council officers developed a draft concept design for Stage 1 of the Masterplan, Victory Square (refer to attachment 2). These concept plans included an overall plan for Victory Square, precedent images of planting types, furniture, materials and play equipment as well as two different options for the layout of the playground. The designs were based on the functional layout and general arrangement of the endorsed masterplan and incorporated all facilities within this proposal. Specifically, the concept designs included: ?Concrete path running along the Southern boundary of Victory Square ?Park lighting?Advanced tree planting on the Southern boundary and more garden beds throughout the park?New DDA compliant playground with various interpretative and traditional play elements?An improved pedestrian entrance from Ashleigh Road?Park benches, bins and picnic settings ?Timber post fencing to separate the playground from dog off leash area and?Two barbeques and a shelter relocated further North from Ashleigh Road ConsultationConsultation on these plans was undertaken for three weeks in March 2019. 743 postcards were posted to surrounding residents and posters were installed on site providing information on how people could contribute and provide feedback. A survey inviting comment and feedback on the concept designs was uploaded to Councils dedicated web page and an on-site workshop was held to discuss the plans in more detail. The survey asked a series of questions seeking support or opposition to various elements within the design. Specifically, survey questions related to proposed surface materials, planting character, locations of footpaths, lighting and various furniture elements, which of the two playground options was preferred and the quantity of barbeques and materials for shelters. 35 on-line surveys were received and there was a strong attendance at the on-site workshop, which received around 50 individual comments. Below is a summary of feedback received (refer to attachment 3 for the consultation report): Park Usage29% of people use the park for dog walking29% us the playground14% use the park for sitting / relaxing10% use the park for ball sports / games and9% use the park for socialisingOpen space 71% support the proposal to convert the synthetic pitch for more lawn area56% preferred native trees over exotic species along the southern border 90% support trees along the northern boundary91% supported planting more ground covers and shrubsFurniture and Materials90% supported installing more lighting81% supported replacing asphalt paths with exposed aggregate concrete paths81% supported installing more seats on the northern and southern boundaries of the parkPlayground, barbeque and shelter 72% would prefer more than two barbeques 66% would like a shelter to be made from timber76% supported incorporating more traditional elements, such as swings and multi- play units75% supported incorporating more natural play elements, such as boulders, timber grass and dried creek bedsAs shown above all components of within the concept designs were generally well supported Local petition Following the conclusion of the consultation period a petition of local residents with 119 signatures was tabled at a Council meeting on the 15 April 2019. The petition ‘…opposed the installation of barbeques, built shelters and other such structures’ and requested that ‘these items be removed from the proposed concept plan and, instead, Council focus on beautifying the square…’Final Victory Square Concept Plan In order to find a balance between those in support of the barbeque and shelter facilities and those in opposition, concept plans were amended as outlined below:(refer to attachment 4):?Removal of all barbeques within the park ?Relocation of the shelter further away from Ashleigh Road to address noise concerns ?Reduction in the size and height of shelter to have less visual impact within the park?Change in shelter material to timber to be more fitting with the natural surroundings These design amendments are considered to find a middle ground between those in support and those in opposition to the barbeque and shelter facilities and allows the delivery of the objective within the Masterplan. It should be noted that the shelter facilities will provide park users with a shelter for playground users and general community and would form a valuable addition to the park for use in inclement weather or shade from the sun. Policy ImplicationsThere are no policy implications associated with this Council decision Financial and Resources ImplicationsCouncil has allocated budget for delivery of the Victory Square component of the masterplan within the current financial year. There are no significant financial or resource implications associated with this decision. Legal advice & implicationsThere is no know legal advice associated with this Council decision. ConclusionSignificant stakeholder engagement has previously been undertaken for the Toorak Park and Victory Square Masterplan. The final masterplan report, adopted by Council on the 3 December, included a deliverable to provide a ‘new accessible playground and picnic area with BBQ and shelter to be located along the Ashleigh Road boundary of Victory Square’.In line with the adopted masterplan, concept plans were further developed for stage one, Victory Square. The concept designs included all components of the masterplan, including two barbeques and a shelter facility within the park. Further consultation on these plans was undertaken in March, 2019 for a period of three weeks which included postcards to over 740 residents and on site posters. The community were invited to provide feedback via an on-line survey or attending a workshop. 35 on-line surveys were completed and around 50 individual comments were received at the workshop. During the formal consultation period, strong support for the majority of components of the Victory Square was received through all formats of this process. More recently and subsequent to the formal consultation, a petition with 119 signatures opposing the installation of barbeques and built shelters was tabled at Council on the 15 April 2019. In response to this petition, the designs have been amended by removing the barbeque facilities and reducing the size and height of the shelter, changing the material to timber and relocating the shelter further away from Ashleigh Road. These amendments are considered to reasonably address the concerns raised by the petition whilst providing adequate facilities for those in support of a shelter within Victory Square. Providing a shelter within the park also responds to the deliverable stated within the Council adopted Masterplan while provide shade and amenity for all park users. Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.Attachment 1 - Council endorsed Toorak Park and Victory Square MasterplanExcluded2.Attachment 2 - Victory Square Draft Concpet plansExcluded3.Attachment 3 - Consultation Summary ReportExcluded4.Attachment 4 - Victory Amended Concept Plan Excluded RecommendationThat Council:1.Endorses the amendments made to the Victory Square play space concept plan following the engagement and recent petition, including the removal of the bbq and the modification and retention of a shelter within the scope of works. 2.The lead petitioner be notified of the proposed amendments to the concept plans 4.Summary of initial community consultation and draft Mount Street MasterplanActing Manager Urban & Infrastructure Projects: Simon McKenzie - McHarg Acting General Manager Assets & Services: Rick Kwasek PurposeTo provide Council with a summary of the initial community engagement process undertaken for the Mount Street Precinct Masterplan and to seek endorsement to undertaking further consultation on the draft masterplan. BackgroundThe Mount Street precinct, Prahran (bordered by King, Bang, High and Chapel Streets) is currently undergoing a transition from single storey light industrial buildings to 8 to 10 storey mixed use commercial, residential and office developments. The continued built form transition, compounded by the area’s increasing population is impacting on the quality and availability of open space within the precinct.In order to improve the character and amenity of the precinct, Council’s Chapel Revision Neighbour Framework Plan identifies the development and implementation of a masterplan for the Mount Street precinct to ‘provide strategic direction and program for streetscape improvements…’ (Pg. 43). The framework plan provides a description of the existing character of individual streets within the Mount Street precinct as follows (Pg. 43):?Clifton/ Mount/ Regent Streets- light industrial, tight spaces, confused in transition. Hard surfaces with landscaping only within old housing sites. Many crossovers?Clifton Street- under radical transformation with the introduction of a large mixed use development on the former Vision Australia Site. Trilogy activates Clifton Street and increases pedestrian space along the footpath?Bang Street- industrial mixed use with public housing?Anchor Place/ Cecil Place- alternative, converted light industrial units?King Street- starting to feel leafy, continuing presence of social housing, presence of Chapel Street emerges.In relation to the public realm, the following objectives have been identified in the Chapel Revision Neighbour Framework Plan (Pg. 43):?Retain and enhance link through the King Street carpark site to provide pedestrian connectivity from Cecil Place to King Street?Investigate a new east - west pedestrian link as public open space or publically accessible open space to enhance pedestrian connections between Clifton Street and Bendigo Street, either as part of future developments or via land acquisitions. ?New links/ lanes, expanded footpaths and pedestrian spaces to create an opportunity for public open space in locations such as Anchor Place and Bendigo, Bangs, Regent and Clifton Streets. ?Investigate the opportunity to create a new public pocket park on the car park at 19 Cecil Place. ?Investigate opportunities to widen footpaths on the eastern side of Regent Street, including considering the removal of on street parking. ?Provide a tree lined footpath along the eastern side of Bangs Street. ?New east - west pedestrian link connecting Clifton Street to Bangs Street.The draft Mount Street Masterplan, discussed within this report seeks to engage the community on these key objectives through a series of proposed changes to the current public realm environment. Councillors were briefed on the broad objectives and concept of the masterplan on the 24 September 2018 with the report outlining the proposed process and key steps for the masterplan development. These steps are summarised below: PhaseCompletion Council report1.Review, ideas and Concept GenerationNovember 2018Not required2.Draft Masterplan (Development and engagement)April 2019May 20193.Final Masterplan (Finalise and exhibition)May 2019June 2019 Council officers have previously completed phase 1- Review, ideas and concept generation and are now reporting on phase 2- Draft Masterplan. DiscussionStakeholder Engagement Initial community and stakeholder engagement was undertaken in November, 2018 as part of Phase 1- Review, ideas and concept generation. This engagement gave insight into how various public spaces are currently used as well as what people liked and disliked within the precinct. A series of high level principals, supported by cross sections of each street’s current condition and precedent images were used to generate discussion and direct feedback. The high level principals were:Identity; creating a strong identity for the precinct with a consistent palette of materials. Creating new authentic spacesIntegrated public realm; embrace external positive characteristics and adjoining existing mature landscapes to provide cohesion & connection with individual spacesActivated; establish a new standard of public realm quality where the site meets the surrounding city context- active street level as comfortable and safe ‘people spaces’ for all hoursCreative; use and build on public art and place activation and programming to build community ownershipFeedback was obtained through a series of on street pop-up surveys, targeted meetings and an onsite workshop. During this process 100 survey responses were received and significant feedback at the community workshop in which over 20 people attended as well as several email responses. This initial feedback together with the Chapel revision framework plan contributed to informing the draft masterplan and has been summarised below in the four most common themes:1-Pedestrian safety, accessibility and amenity: Participants spoke of narrow, poor quality and uneven footpaths surfaces, with several comments relating to the many obstacles such as bins, furniture and electricity poles restricting pedestrian movement. The need for a clear, unobstructed footpaths was commonly mentioned. In general, respondents were supportive of improving lighting to create a safer environment and implementing wider footpaths to allow people to walk side by side, use prams and wheelchairs improving accessibility and to allow more space for public furniture and cafe dining and retail. 2-Greenery: There was a strong interest to create a variety of green spaces and to improve the street environment with street trees fitting to the size and scale of each street. Respondents were in favour of more trees, landscaping and softening the edges between building, footpath and road.3-A Place for community: Participants spoke of activating the public realm, particularly at street corners with spaces that cater for a diversity of user and age groups. Participants welcomed the project as an opportunity to create spaces for community events and informal gatherings. Some concern was expressed relating to the misuse of public spaces, and the general need for better lighting within the precinct.4-Traffic and parking: Participants expressed concern with illegal traffic movement, unsafe speeds, cut-through traffic and dangerous intersections. Participants provided mixed responses in relation to parking, while some were in favour of retaining the existing numbers, others mentioned that parking should take less priority in favour of wider footpaths and pedestrian amenity. Suggestions included removing all day parking in favour of 1 or 2 hour spots and reducing parking to allow for more landscaping/trees, kerb outstands, cafe dining and retail spaces. Refer to attachment 1 for the initial community and stakeholder engagement summary.Draft Mount Street Precinct Masterplan Mount Street Precinct Masterplan has been developed following the findings from the initial community and stakeholder consultation along with professional industry advice and reference to the Chapel Revision framework plan. Consistent with the themes identified within the community feedback above, the draft masterplan was developed on the below themes:?Pedestrian safety and amenity?Greenery?A place for community?Traffic and parkingThe draft masterplan seeks to improve pedestrian amenity, create safer and more useable spaces during the day and night, facilitate more and varied commercial, retail, food and service industries and restore a balance between pedestrian space and on-street parking. These objectives would in turn create ‘local character’, ‘sense of place’ and a destination for the local community. Refer to attachment 2- draft Mount Street Precinct Masterplan Pedestrian safety and amenity:Wider footpathsThe current condition of each street within the precinct is relatively dominated by the vehicle carriageway and on-street parking (permit, one-hour, two-hour, loading etc.). Refer to attachment 3- Typical Street Environment. This street environment has restricted footpath widths impacts on an accessible clear path of travel for pedestrians. As such, there is limited opportunity to widen footpaths and improve walkability or to implement other positive elements that would contribute to a creating ‘character’ and a ‘sense of place’. The masterplan and seeks to restore a balance between these competing demands by replacing some car spaces at strategic locations (such as adjoining open spaces or proposed shared zones) with wider footpaths. This additional pedestrian space will then be available for public lighting, furniture, art and street trees as well as space for on-street dining and retail activity. Shared Zones and pedestrian crossingsA shared zone refers to a street environment where pedestrians, cyclist and motorist share the same road space however giving the pedestrian a higher priority. The draft masterplan proposes a series of shared zones at strategic locations along Regent, Mount, Clifton Streets and Cecil Place to better connect adjoining open spaces and reinforce pedestrian movement through the precinct. Materials within these shared zones will typically be of a higher specification to differentiate from a typical street and will most likely be flush with the adjoining footpath heights to control vehicle speeds. Dining and retail will be encouraged at these shared zones to help activate the spaces. Greenery:The majority of streets within the precinct lack any vegetation or tree canopy and as such, the draft masterplan proposes new tree planting on either one or both sides of each streets, depending on availability of space. Regular spaced trees will create a consistent canopy and selected species will respond to the size and scale of each street. In order to allow for a strong canopy growth, overhead powerlines are proposed to be removed from each street to ensure the trees do not require pruning when reaching maturity. Introducing trees to each of the streets will not only provide a cooler, well shaded and comfortable environment, it also aligns to Council’s commitment to improving the urban forest as stated within the Urban Forest Strategy, 2017 to ‘Increased vegetation cover; improved health and quality of the urban forest; create a greater resilience to a changing climate; reduced urban heat island effect; enhanced amenity and liveability’ (Pg. 4) More greenery is also proposed within each of the pocket parks, discussed below. These will have a variety of new trees, garden beds and open lawn spaces to encourage and promote community use.A place for community:East-west connectionThe draft masterplan identifies a series of properties, determined within Council’s strategies for creating open space to be purchased and converted into open space. These properties have been strategically identified to provide a strong east-west pedestrian connection through the centre of the precinct, connecting the government housing on Bang Street through to Chapel Street. In contrast to the surrounding built form, these spaces will be green, well-lit and open parks and will facilitate community interaction, passive recreation and promote a healthy lifestyle for the local community. As discussed above shared zones have been identified adjacent to these parks to help strengthen the east-west connection and activate the areas where the park meets the street.Council owned carparkAs identified within the Chapel ReVision Neighbourhood Framework Plan, the draft masterplan identifies the future potential to reallocate parking within in the Council owned carpark at 19 Cecil Place and convert this space into a public park or plaza. The carpark is located centrally within the masterplan boundaries and its conversion has the potential to provide a significant amount of additional open space (1000m2) in a relatively dense urban environment. The potential for open space also helps to strengthen and improve the amenity and functionality of the east-west pedestrian connection, discussed above. The masterplan acknowledges that this objective requires further detailed investigation and consultation and as such is identified as a long term objective within the draft masterplan stating ‘Council Owned Carpark- Potential future Open Space’ (Mount Street Precinct Masterplan, Pg. 29). In the short term an opportunity exists to improve the pedestrian environment and connection through the car park to provide a strong east west connection. TrafficThe masterplan proposes to retain the current traffic movement along every street within the precinct. In response to community feedback relating to high vehicle speeds and cut-through traffic, traffic calming devices to control motorist’s speeds will be developed in the form of shared zones and pedestrian crossings. Raised pavements with changes in surface materials as well as reduced carriageway width will contribute to reducing speeds, creating a safer and more passive environment. Car parkingCouncil has undertaken a car park occupancy survey for the precinct, which found that there is currently high demand for on-street parking, with 80% occupied for the majority of time on weekdays and weekends. The masterplan acknowledges this demand and seeks to find a balance between this and the objective of enhancing the amenity and safety of the public realm. As such, the masterplan proposes a reduction in on-street car parking while increasing loading zones throughout the precinct. The locations to reduce parking have been strategically chosen where the pedestrian environment will benefit the most and impact to parking will be minimised. Car spaces adjoin shared zones on Bangs, Regent, Mount and Clifton Streets and adjoining pocket parks have been identified for removal to provide the strongest possible east-west pedestrian connection through the precinct allowing opportunities for greening and creation of shared zones. Regent Street is proposed to have to highest loss of car parking as this street has the strongest potential for public realm improvements and is one of the narrowest streets within the precinct. Cecil Place, Clifton, King, Bangs and Mount Streets are proposed to have indented tree planting within the carriageway in order to limit the loss of car spaces on these streets. Census data captured within the Social and Commercial Impact Assessment (refer, attachment 4) indicates that 29.8% of residents within the precinct currently do not own a motor vehicle (Pg. 22) and there is an increasing trend in reliance and use of public transport as currently 45.8% of residents within the precinct use active and public transports.(Pg. 21). Given the close proximity to public transport, with trams running parallel to the eastern and southern boundaries and the Prahran Train Station within 400 meters, it is expected that the need for on-street car parking will reduce in the coming decades. As such, the proposed 20% reduction in on-street parking to allow for wider footpaths, street trees, public furniture and art as well as spaces for dining and retail is seen to be a balanced and considered response for meeting the future needs of the local community for the coming decades. Below are cross sections of proposed changes to each Street extracted from the draft Masterplan attached: Bangs Street (Looking North)- Retain two-way access to the east- Retain parking bays to the west with new tree bays- Upgrades to street lighting- Widening of footpath to the west- Undergrounding powerlines- Some car parks removedKing Street (Looking East)- New tree planting to the South-Retain two-way access-Upgrades to street lighting-Widening footpath on both sidesRegent Street (Looking North)- Wider footpath to both sides- Retain one-way access to the north- Majority of parking bays removed- Tree planting to the east- Upgrades to street lighting- Retain existing loading bays- Underground powerlinesMount Street (Looking North)- Retain one-way access to the south- Retain majority of Parking bays to the east with new tree bays- Retain footpath width to the West-Sightly increasing footpath width to the East- Upgrades to street lighting-Some parking bays removed-Loading bays retained-Underground powerlinesClifton Street (Looking North)- Widening footpath and new tree planting on both sides.- Retain one-way access to the north- Upgrades to street lighting- Some car parks removed-New loading bays- Underground powerlinesCecil Place (Looking East)-Modify kerb alignment to the south to include new tree planting, and wide footpath/ opportunities for on street dining-Two-way access-Loading Zones to the south to be retained.-Parking Spaces to the south to be removed-Upgrades to street lighting-Opportunity to make a portion of the street, beyond the multi-level car park entry into a car free open space.Anchor Place (Looking East)- Retain one-way access- Replace parking bays to the north with loading bays.- Widen footpath on both sides - Tree planting to the north- Upgrades to street lighting- Opportunity to temporarily close the Anchor Place to vehicles at Council preferred times such as weekends. Thus, connecting, activating and enticing people in from Chapel Street.Draft Masterplan AssessmentA social and commercial impact assessment (Refer attachment 5) was commissioned to assess and understand the expected impacts the proposed masterplan would have on the local community. The study based its assessment on changes to on-street parking, traffic configuration, new open spaces and increased pedestrian amenity and used case studies from similar scale and context as precedents. The findings are summarised below:?‘A well-designed public realm is crucial to supporting higher density infill development across a mix of uses’. (Pg. 33).?‘Pedestrian-focussed landscaping introduces a better retail environment compared to environments with car’ (Pg. 33).?‘Public realm improvements support emerging creative industries that thrive in a high-amenity urban environment’ (Pg. 33). The report concluded by stating the positive impacts associated with the draft masterplan would most likely be:?‘Increased amenity’?‘Improved access and connectivity’?‘Improved community cohesion’?‘Improved health and safety’?‘Improved commercial operations’Loss of car parking within the precinct was identified as potentially having a negative impact toward the local community, however when considered with the positive benefits, such as wider footpaths and greenery should provide a balanced approach. The report identified the significance of this impact as moderate. The report also suggested that ‘the duration of this impact might be expected to be relatively short as visitors familiarise themselves with the amended configuration of streets and parking’ (Pg. 37).Future Consultation Subject to Council endorsement of the draft masterplan, Council officers will commence phase 3 of the masterplan development and engagement process. This will include publically releasing the draft masterplan and undertaking an appropriate stakeholder engagement process. This process will include several workshops with residents, local businesses third party service authorities and internal council departments who would be most affected by these changes. A survey will be developed to gather direct feedback on specific design proposals and the plans will be used as a discussion point for community comment. Following the engagement process, adjustments will be made to the draft masterplan where appropriate and the final masterplan along with the consultation summary will be brought back to council for consideration and adoption.Policy ImplicationsDevelopment of the Mount Street Precinct Masterplan has been identified as an objective within the Chapel Revision Structure Plan and as such aligns with Councils policies and strategic direction. Financial and Resources ImplicationsFunding for implementation of specific stages of the masterplan will need to be referred for consideration in the preparation of future capital budgets. Legal advice & implicationsThere is no known legal advice or implications associated with the development of the Mount Street Precinct Masterplan.ConclusionThe Mount Street area in Prahran is currently undergoing significant development and is transitioning from an area with mostly single storey light industrial buildings to 8 to 10 storey mixed use commercial, residential and office buildings. This transition is creating a higher demand for available public space and improved amenity for the growing community. In response to this, the Chapel Revision Neighbourhood Framework Plan has identified the need for a masterplan to identify opportunities to implement a variety of public realm improvements to contribute to creating a ‘sense of place’ for the local community. A draft Mount Street Precinct masterplan has been developed based on initial stakeholder feedback which seeks to improve pedestrian safety and amenity, provide more greenery and create a place for communities and is in line with the Chapel Revision Framework plan. This reports seeks council support prior to moving to the next phase of consultation on the draft masterplan.Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.Attachment 1, summery of findings from the initial community & stakeholder engagementExcluded2.Attachment 2, draft masterplan proposalExcluded3.Attachment 3, typical street environmentExcluded4.Attachment 4, private vehicle ownership within precinctExcluded5.Attachment 5, Social and commercial impact assessmenExcluded RecommendationThat Council:1.Note the stakeholder engagement process undertaken for the development of the draft Mount Street Precinct Masterplan 2.Endorse proceeding to the next round of stakeholder engagement on the Draft Mount Street Precinct Masterplan as outlined in this report. 3.A further report be prepared for Council for consideration on the Draft Mount Street Masterplan, summarising the engagement findings. 5.Regional Business Case Advance Waste and Resource Recovery TechnologiesManager Physical Operations: Noel Kiernan Acting General Manager Assets & Services: Rick Kwasek PurposeTo inform Council of a regional business case aimed at reducing the amount of waste going to landfill, and seek Council endorsement to participate in an expression of interest for an Advanced Waste Processing Technology Project being co-ordinated by the Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Group.BackgroundLocal, state and federal governments are facing substantial challenges in relation to the generation and disposal of waste including:?Population and economic growth substantially increasing the amount of waste being generated. In Stonnington waste generation (including municipal solid waste, commercial and industrial waste and construction and demolition waste) is projected to more than double from 97,000 tonnes per annum in 2016 to 237,000 tonnes per annum by 2051.?Landfill capacity rapidly decreasing with no new landfill sites proposed, and the landfill sites to the south east of Melbourne expected to close significantly earlier than previously projected. The most recent advice is that the SUEZ Hallam site may close as early as 2028 rather than 2040 as previously projected. ?Rapidly increasing costs associated with landfill. The average fee Stonnington Council pays to access landfill has risen from $41 per tonne in 2009/10 to $103 per tonne in 2018/19. This will increase further to $118 per tonne by 2020/21, and based upon the current regulatory environment, is projected to rise to $146 per tonne by 2025/2026. This means the cost to Council to access landfill will increase by over $1.3 million per annum between 2018/19 and 2025/26 and may increase further if there are additional changes to the regulatory environment.?Significantly reduced capacity to export recyclable material to China for processing.?An increasing understanding of the environmental and social impacts of landfill and rapidly changing community expectations about how governments will respond to this. Combined, these factors mean the continuation of current waste management practices is not a medium to long term option available to government. The City of Stonnington, along with other local governments throughout Victoria must explore ways of reducing the amount of waste generated in their communities and find alternate solutions for waste disposal. Some councils are seeking residual processing solutions that are local, have the potential to boost local employment, and are based on proven technologies. Further, many councils in the south and east of Melbourne (including Stonnington Council) are actively considering offering food and garden organic (FOGO) collections and processing to further advance resource recovery. The Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Group (MWRRG) has been working with clusters of Councils to develop business cases to deliver opportunities for advanced waste treatments that will reduce the amount of waste being sent to landfill. As part of this, the Victorian State Government’s Sustainability Fund has funded the MWRRG to: ?Develop a Regional Business Case that identifies opportunities to divert residual waste from landfill through advanced waste processing solutions;?Develop a detailed business case for councils in the south-east of metropolitan Melbourne; and?Facilitate procurement for advanced waste processing solutions in the metropolitan region.The City of Stonnington has participated in the development of the Regional Business Cases and must consider its future involvement in the project. This report outlines the key findings from the Regional Business Case, recent planning work in relation to the detailed Business Case for south-east metropolitan Melbourne, key timelines and decision points, and key considerations for Council.DiscussionThe MWRRG has led the development of a Regional Business Case and Procurement Strategy for advanced waste and resource recoveries technologies to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill. The Business Case provides a detailed assessment of advanced waste processing and evaluates the viability of these technologies in responding to Melbourne’s growing municipal waste. It also outlines a pathway for Councils to procure complex waste management infrastructure.Advanced Waste Processing SolutionsAdvanced waste processing solutions recover more resources from waste compared to landfill or basic recycling sorting. They can include but are not limited to:?Mechanical separation to recover recyclables. ?Biological treatment of organic material such as composting or digestion to divert organics from landfills. ?Waste being broken down using heat with a limited amount of air, to produce a gas that can be used for energy. These types of technologies have been successfully implemented overseas and can bridge the current gap between recycling and sending kerbside waste to landfill. Appetite for Advanced Waste Processing SolutionsWhile there is interest from the commercial market in investing in the development of advanced waste resource and recovery technology, a key impediment is the lack of certainty about the supply of waste. Typically, local councils including Stonnington, have individually entered into contracts for the collection and sorting of waste. While there are some examples of collaboration between local councils, this has been limited and of a small scale. The MWRRG Regional Business Case proposes a far more collaborative and large-scale approach to waste collection and sorting, with the viability of advanced waste processing solutions built around a guaranteed minimum supply of waste from multiple councils. The Regional Business Case identifies there are varying appetites for establishing residual waste processing solutions, but that there are potentially three geographically based clusters of councils with similar aspirations in the south and east, the north and western councils and the inner metropolitan councils.Business Case FindingsThe initial Regional Business Case examined four scenarios. While a preferred scenario was not identified, it was acknowledged that the technologies with the strongest technical and commercial track records of recovering value from residual municipal solid waste are, mass burn combustion with energy recovery, and mechanical biological treatment (MBT) coupled with some form of energy recovery (either combustion or gasification). Four options related to these technologies were examined in more detail in the detailed Business Case for south-east metropolitan Melbourne including:?Option 1: Combustion of waste materials at controlled high temperature. Includes energy recovery in the form of heat and/or electricity. Metals are recovered from the bottom ash produced from the combustion process.?Option 2: Includes mechanical separation of materials (e.g. metals) plus biological treatment of organic material separated during the mechanical process. The biological treatment process (anaerobic digestion) produces energy.?Option 3: Mechanical separation of materials (e.g. metals) and biological treatment of organic material separated during the mechanical process. The biological treatment process (anaerobic digestion) produces energy. A refuse derived fuel (RDF) is produced from outputs from the mechanical process. The RDF is then combusted to recover energy.?Option 4: Mechanical separation of materials (e.g. metals) and biological treatment of organic material separated during the mechanical process. The biological treatment process (anaerobic digestion) produces energy. A refuse derived fuel is produced from outputs from the mechanical process. The fuel is then ‘gasified’ to recover energy. The process involves heating the fuel to high temperatures to produce ‘syngas’ that can be used in an on-site gas engine or a furnace to produce electricity or exported for off-site use.The analysis to date has found, all four options can deliver better environmental and social outcomes than landfill, while three of the four options will also cost less than continued use of landfill.The Business Case found the capital cost of constructing advanced waste technologies (estimated to be up to $500 million) can be financed by the private sector, with the cost recouped over time through the collection of processing fees. Councils, commercial or industrial operators will pay a fee for each tonne of residual waste they process through the advanced waste technology. The processing fees are projected to be on average between $225 and $259 per tonne of waste over 20 years. The Business Case projects the cost to access landfill will be on average $260 per tonne of waste over 20 years from commencement of the advance waste processing facilities. While this is significantly higher than the current average fees, it is understood to be based upon key assumptions about the rapidly rising cost of accessing landfill. As noted earlier in this report, the landfill fees Stonnington Council pays rose from $41 per tonne in 2009/10 to $103 per tonne in 2018/19, and they are projected to increase to $146 per tonne by 2025/2026. Beyond the Initial Business CaseKey factors to be examined and addressed to progress the development of advanced waste treatments include:?Governance arrangements?Procurement ?Risk management?ProbityMWRRG has been working with 17 metropolitan councils in the south east and east of Melbourne including the City of Stonnington to examine the factors outlined above and progress the procurement of advanced waste and resource recoveries technologies for this part of metropolitan Melbourne.LG Working GroupsSince late 2018, a series of workshops have been held on key topics and a Council Executive Group comprising the CEOs of five of the participating Councils has been formed. The CEOs are from Greater Dandenong, Frankston, Mornington Peninsula, Casey and Bayside. Each of the CEOs is leading a working group to progress the following topics:1.Performance standards and outcomes2.Transactional arrangements and governance structures3.Contract model and allocation of risk4.Procurement method5.Strategic advocacy and fundingCity of Stonnington is actively participating in the working group about transactional arrangements and governance structures.Current planning is for the procurement process to commence in July-2019 with an expression of interest process. The expression of interest will seek to identify companies who are interested and able to develop and operate advanced waste resource and recovery technologies. It will not specify a preferred technology but instead require firms to identify the technology they believe will best suit the needs of local councils in the south east and east of Melbourne, and how the operator will respond to changes in technology and changes in the feed stock available (waste supply) over time. Figure 1 below outlines the proposed procurement timetable which is built around the following stages:1.Expression of Interest – this will be an open approach to identify an initial pool of suitable bidders.2.Invitation to Submit Outline Solution – this approach will be to a selected market to inform detailed specifications.3.Invitation to Submit Detailed Solution – this approach will be to a selected market and will inform the final tender specifications.4.Call for Final Tender – this will identify the preferred bidder and solution. This stage will include firm commitments by participating Councils to enter into the term contract.Figure 1: Proposed Procurement TimetableTable 1 below outlines the key decision points for Councils participating in the project. The initial decision point for Stonnington Council is whether to participate in the Expression of Interest process. Decision pointCouncil considerationsDP1June 2019Councils agree an Outline Specification and commit to participate in the Expression of Interest phase of the procurement process; work with MWRRG to investigate an SPV; and are party to an interim authorisation from ACCC.DP2Oct 2019Councils endorse the short-list of bidders following the EOI stage; agree to any minor revisions to the Outline Specification and participate in the Outline Solutions stageDP3May 2020Councils endorse the short-list of bidders following the OS stage; agree to the Detailed Specification and participate in the Detailed Solutions stageDP4Dec 2020Councils endorse the short-list of bidders following the DS stage; agree to the Final Specification and participate in the Final Tender stage; and are party to a final authorisation from ACCCDP5May 2021Councils endorse the appointment of the Preferred Bidder(s) following the FT stage; and authorise MWRRG / Council Negotiation Team to negotiate the remaining elements of the contract(s)DP6Dec 2021Councils endorse the appointment of the contractor(s) and sign the contract(s)An advocacy and communications plan is currently being developed to support approaches to potential funders including the Victorian State Government. Key state government departments have been briefed about the Business Case. Key Considerations for Council In considering Council’s future involvement in the procurement of advanced waste and resource recoveries technologies for south east and east Melbourne, Council must have regard for the following. ?Governance of the project?Financial and contractual requirements and risks?The rapid changes in waste and resource recovery technology?The options available for Council to participate?Council’s current waste management arrangements and securing a long-term alternative for waste disposal. Governance of the ProjectA separate entity (special purpose vehicle - SPV) will need to be established under S193 of the LG Act to procure advanced waste and resource recoveries technologies for participating Councils as MWRRG is not able to deliver and operate solutions on behalf of councils. A SPV is a company established by participating councils through share ownership. The number of councils required to participate in the SPV will be determined by the quantity of waste to be supplied by councils rather than an absolute number of councils. Collectively Councils will need to commit to supply of around 150,000 tonnes of residual municipal solid waste annually. The SPV will be governed by an independent skills-based board. Councillors and council officers will not be eligible to be members of the board.Councils do not need to be a member of the SPV to participate in the project.While the SPV is proposed to be independent and arm’s length from local government, some uncertainty remains about the risk exposure for councils. The working group examining transactional arrangements and governance structures (of which Stonnington is a member) is investigating this issue. Financial and Contractual Requirements and RisksIf Stonnington Council participates as a member SPV, Council will be required to purchase a share to the value of $1 in the shell company.Council may also be required to provide additional capitalisation to help provide more assurance and credibility to future contractor(s). Options being investigated and considered for capitalisation include:?Cash deposits by participating councils in a bank account?Creation of a company bond amortised across the participating councils?Securing an insurance bond?Investment by state government in the SPV. The MWRRG and councils are investigating capitalisation options and will report back to the working group examining transactional arrangements and governance structures.There are a number of risks associated with the procurement of advanced waste processing solutions including:?Risks related to the procurement process and partnering arrangements?Contracting risks related to security of waste supply, waste composition, planning and approvals, and changes in law?Finance and commercial risk. Better understanding of the fees councils will be required to pay to process waste through the advanced waste processing technology will need to be addressed as part of the procurement phase. In addition, further clarity is required about the assumptions underpinning the projected fees for disposal of waste to landfill in the future. The multi stage procurement process has been designed to minimise risks, promotes transparency and reduces risk during and after the procurement stage. In addition, the working groups examining the contract model and allocation of risk, and the procurement method will be examining these risks in more detail. Changing TechnologyAdvanced waste processing solutions technology is changing rapidly and there is a risk any infrastructure developed for this project will be superseded in the future. The working group established to examine performance standards and outcomes will be exploring this issue and looking at options to address this through the procurement and contract process. Options Available to CouncilThe options available to councils are still being clarified and developed but are likely to include the following:1.Be a member of the SPV.2.Enter into a service delivery arrangement with the SPV for the supply of waste, however this will need to be tested as part of an application for authorisation by the ACCC. 3.Contract directly with the SPV’s appointed service provider, however, councils would either have to run their own procurement process prior to entering into contract, or seek an exemption from the Minister for Local Government.4.Not be a part of the procurement or the future advanced waste processing solution in any form.Further investigation work is to be undertaken by MWRRG to assess the viability options 2 and 3.Current Waste Management Arrangements and Securing a Long-Term Alternative for Waste Disposal in a Stonnington ContextCurrently the City of Stonnington has contracts with Cleanaway, the Melbourne Regional Landfill (a Cleanaway subsidiary), the City of Wyndham and Hanson Pty Ltd for the disposal of municipal solid waste (waste from households). In total, 30,000 tonnes of waste is collected and sent to landfill per annum. Of this, 21,000 tonnes is kerbside collected garbage, with around 40 percent disposed of through the South East Melbourne Transfer Station and 60 percent through the Stonnington Waste Transfer Station. The majority of the waste collected through the Stonnington Waste Transfer Station is sent to the Melbourne Regional Landfill or the City of Wyndham Landfill both of which are located in the west of Melbourne. As outlined, diversifying the disposal of waste has been an effective risk mitigation strategy for Council for many years. For example, if road conditions on any given day mean it is not possible to access landfill sites in the west, waste can be disposed of at the South East Melbourne Transfer Station. While the approach outlined in the Business Case for advanced waste and resource recovery technologies represents a notable change from Council’s current approach to waste management, there are multiple factors which indicate Council must actively seek alternate ways of dealing with waste disposal. These factors include: ?The rising cost of sending waste to landfill and the reducing availability of landfill sites e.g. the impending closure of landfill sites in south east Melbourne in 2025. ?The increase in waste generation projected for the City of Stonnington.?The increasing focus upon reducing waste and reducing the waste being sent to landfill by state and federal governments.?Increasing community expectations about governments responding quickly and effectively to climate change issues.The Advanced Waste Processing Technology Project is a key opportunity for Council to investigate and potentially pursue alternate ways of dealing with waste disposal. Next StepsIt is proposed that Council participate in the Expression of Interest process for the procurement of advanced waste and resource recoveries technologies. As part of this, Council officers will continue to participate in the working group about transactional arrangements and governance structures and will be actively involved in any information or briefing sessions offered by the MWRRG. Further information will be brought to Council for consideration as the procurement process proceeds. Policy ImplicationsThe Council Plan 2017-2021 sets out Council’s commitment to creating a sustainable and resilient City, with enhanced natural and urban environments for the community. Environment is one of the four pillars of the Council Plan, which includes strategies to manage and use resources efficiently, enhance biodiversity and lead community sustainability. The Sustainable Environment Strategy supports the delivery of these broad strategies and addresses the issues of key importance within the community. The key objectives of the strategy relevant to this project are to:?demonstrate Council’s commitment to sustainability;?improve Council’s own environmental performance and practices; and?integrate sustainability into the planning and delivery of Council infrastructure, services, facilities and planning functions.The Strategy specifically states that Council will increase resource recovery and advocate for improved waste management and infrastructure programs. In addition, Council will support the community to increase the diversion of materials from landfill and increase the diversion of food waste from landfill. Participation in the advanced waste and resource recoveries technologies project proposed by MWRRG, will allow Council to progress these strategic objectives. Financial and Resources ImplicationsParticipation in the Expression of Interest process for the procurement of advanced waste and resource recoveries technologies can be undertaken within existing Council resources.The final cost to Council of participating further in the project is currently unknown. Council will be advised of resource implications as the project progresses further. Legal advice & implicationsLegal advice has been sought by MWRRG about the existing legislation and MWRRG’s procurement responsibilities. The advice found MWRRG is not able to deliver and operate advanced waste resource and recovery solutions on behalf of councils. The advice concluded the most appropriate means available for councils to aggregate the long-term supply of contract waste and provide a single-point entity to enter into contract with the private sector for the design, construction, commissioning and operation of an advanced waste processing solution is a special purpose vehicle (SPV). MWRRG are also seeking advice from the ACCC in respect of an authorisation for the councils that wish to form an SPV, and as to how a service delivery arrangement by non-SPV councils would correspond to ACCC requirements.ConclusionWhile the approach outlined in the business case for advanced waste and resource recovery technologies represents a notable change from Council’s current approach to waste management, it has the potential to offer alternate waste disposal solutions that deliver an environmentally sustainable approach to meeting Council’s waste management responsibilities and objectives. In considering the nature of its involvement, Council will need to have regard for the financial implications, the risks associated with the project and whether Council’s interests and needs are adequately addressed. Council will need to be satisfied that the range of technologies adopted will provide a sustainable and long-term cost-effective business model into the future.The involvement of Council in the Expression of Interest for the procurement of advanced waste technologies will allow Council to continue to participate in the project while further detailed investigation and due diligence work occurs that seeks to address areas of risk and more fully develop the project. Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.Advanced Waste and Recovery Business CaseExcluded RecommendationThat Council:1.Note the status of the Advanced Waste Processing Technology Project.2.Agrees to participate in the Expression of Interest process for the procurement of advanced waste and resource recoveries technologies.3.Receives further updates about the Advanced Waste Processing Technology Project before deciding on further involvement in the project. 6.1 / 8 Motherwell Street South Yarra - Vehicle Crossing ApplicationManager Amenity & Compliance: Madeleine Grove General Manager Planning & Amenity: Stuart Draffin PurposeThe purpose of this report is to determine a Vehicle Crossing Application for 1/8 Motherwell Street, South Yarra.Consideration of this application has been ‘called up’ by Councillors. Council at its meeting on 6 May 2019 resolved that the matter be referred to the Council meeting on 20 May 2019 for consideration. BackgroundOn 31 December 2018 Council received an application from the owner of Unit 1, 8 Motherwell Street to construct a new vehicle crossing. The unit is part of an existing three-storey block of twelve flats.Currently, there is an allocation of eleven car parking spaces at the rear of the site that are accessed via the existing crossover. These car spaces are part of the Common Property and are leased to 11 of the unit owners. Unit 1 does not have an off street car space at the rear of the site nor is there enough room for the creation of another car space. As a result of this, the apartment owners have entered into a 99 year lease with the Owners Corporation to create a car space in the Common Property within the front setback.The applicant seeks approval for a 3m wide vehicle crossing on the Motherwell Street frontage of the property, with 1.3m splays either side of the crossing as per Council’s Vehicle Crossing Policy. The applicant proposes to locate the crossing immediately to the right of an existing Council street tree. The application was referred to Council’s Arborist as the proposed crossing location was in close proximity to an established Claret Ash street tree. Council’s Arborist requested that the applicant conduct a Non-Destructive Root Investigation (NDRI) to ascertain the risk of damage to the nearby street tree. The owner engaged the services of an independent arborist who advised the owner that due to the proximity of tree to the proposed crossing, the street tree would require removal should the construction of the crossing be approved. Vehicle Crossing PolicyCouncil’s Vehicle Crossing Policy was adopted by Council on 17 September 2007. One of the key objectives of the policy is to prevent inappropriate loss of significant street trees, vegetation and landscaping. This objective is linked to other Council policies such as the Urban Forest Strategy which aims to provide clear direction for the protection, management and planting of trees on public and private land across Stonnington.In protecting public street trees, a minimum of 2 metres or 10 times the diameter of the tree trunk at its base (whichever is greater), must be provided between the trunk of any street tree and the edge of the crossover unless Council’s Arborist allows otherwise.DiscussionRemoval of a Healthy Street TreeThe applicant is proposing to remove an established, 30-year-old Claret Ash tree from its present location in the naturestrip on the Motherwell Street frontage of the property so as to enable access to a car parking space. The relevant objectives are considered to be:?To prevent inappropriate loss of significant street trees, vegetation and landscaping;The tree is part of a consistent avenue of Claret Ash trees and it contributes significantly to the streetscape of Motherwell Street. Council’s Arborist is of the view that a successful replanting or replacement of such a substantial tree is not possible, as the size of the root ball associated with a tree of similar size would not fit into the available space on the nature strip. Additionally, an independent arborist has confirmed that the tree will require removal if the crossover is to be constructed in the proposed location. As a consequence, the options are to either to retain a healthy street tree or to remove the tree to allow for the construction of the proposed vehicle crossing.The applicant has provided two examples of existing street trees located in close proximity to vehicle crossings at 11a White Street, Malvern and 13 Epping Street, Malvern East. In reviewing these examples it is considered that in both cases the established street trees were most likely planted beside existing crossovers many years ago. As the trees have now reached maturity, the increase in the trunk girth after 40-50 years has reduced the distance between the edge of the crossover and the street trees.In contrast, the scenario at 8 Motherwell Street involves an existing established street tree, prior to the proposed construction of a vehicle crossing. The applicant proposes reducing the soil level directly beside the trunk to construct a new vehicle crossing where there are most likely large structural roots that stabilise the tree and supply the tree with the level of moisture it requires to remain alive.If the applicant had demonstrated by way of NDRI that no structural roots are present where the excavation is to occur, then Council’s Arboriculture Unit would have had no objection to the proposal.If the NDRI indicates that structural roots would be severed by the construction works which could compromise the health and structural stability of the street tree, then Council’s Arboriculture Unit would not support the proposal.Transport and Parking considerationsThe applicant proposes a 2.8m wide crossing with 1.3m splays on either side of the crossing. Due to the proximity of the street tree, a splay on the eastern (or left) side of the crossing may not be possible. The vehicle crossing could be approved without the requirement of an eastern splay. In this case Council’s Transport Engineer has recommended that the owner provides a B99 turning template that demonstrates access and egress to the property. Using the applicable Australian Standard there are approximately three parking spaces abutting the subject site on-street. Four informal spaces would occupy the spaces dependent on a different mix (i.e. smaller cars) of cars using the spaces. The proposal would retain one space on the east side of the crossing, and one on the west side. Therefore, there would be a net loss of one on-street parking space, as the space directly in front of the crossing would be moved off-street.ConclusionThe Vehicle Crossing application for 1/8 Motherwell Street has been considered by Officers in consultation with relevant Council Departments.It is considered that the application fails to meet Council Vehicle Crossing Policy objectives, namely:?To prevent inappropriate loss of significant street trees, vegetation and landscapingThe primary concern of the application is the removal of the Claret Ash street tree. The vehicle crossing application is not supported as the crossing cannot be constructed on the Motherwell Street frontage of the property without the destruction of the street tree.Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.PA - 1 of 8 Motherwell Street South Yarra - Attachment 1 of 1Excluded RecommendationThat Council:1.Refuse the Vehicle Crossing Application for 1/8 Motherwell Street on the basis of non-compliance with Council’s Vehicle Crossing Policy and the Urban Forest Strategy objective to prevent inappropriate loss of significant street trees, vegetation and landscaping;2.Advise the Applicant of Council’s decision. 7.Council Financial Report for the Period Ending 31 March 2019Manager Finance: Jon Gorst General Manager Corporate Services: Geoff Cockram PurposeTo provide Council with an update on Stonnington City Council’s financial performance for the period ending 31 March 2019.BackgroundSection 138 of the Local Government Act requires the provision of a quarterly financial report to an open Council meeting comparing the budgeted revenue and expenditure for the financial year with the actual revenue and expenditure to date.DiscussionExecutive SummaryThe year to date surplus including open space contributions at 31 March 2019 was $64.4M against a budget of $56.5M, a favourable / positive variance of $7.9M. The year to date surplus excluding open space contributions at 31 March 2019 was $52.7M against a budget of $49.0M, a favourable variance of $3.7M.The surplus including open space contributions is expected to be $50.3M by 30 June 2019, resulting in a forecast favourable full year variance to budget of $12.5M.The surplus excluding open space contributions is expected to be $35.3M by 30 June 2019, resulting in a forecast favourable full year variance to budget of $7.5M. The year to date surplus is $7.9M greater than the year to date budgeted surplus and is mainly due to:?Higher than budgeted operating income of $5.4M, particularly higher than budgeted monetary contributions $4.1M, user fees being higher than budgeted by $332K, capital grants income favourable by $1.1M (unbudgeted grants) and other income being $847K favourable (predominantly unbudgeted cost recoveries). These are partially offset by lower than budgeted rates income ($383K) due to lower supplementary rate income, lower than budgeted statutory fees & fines ($576K) due to delays in receiving infringement income from Fines Victoria and operating grants income being $51K lower than budgeted.?Operating expenditure is $2.5M less than the year to date budget. This is primarily due to the timing of materials and services expenditure $1.6M, borrowing costs being $441K favourable due to budgeted loan borrowings being undertaken in December 2018 (was originally budgeted for July 2018), depreciation being lower than budgeted by $494K (due to delays in the completion and capitalisation of the capital works program) and operating initiatives expenditure being $305K favourable (timing). As at 31 March 2019, Council held $129.8M in cash and investments. Council achieved a year to date working capital ratio of 4.00, indicating a continued strong ability to meet its current financial commitments. Net assets were $3.1B at 31 March 2019. Operating Result – Full Year ForecastThe full year forecast surplus compared to the full year original budget surplus is expected to be $12.5M favourable. Operating IncomeFull year income is forecast to be $11.9M favourable as a result of:?$872K higher than budgeted statutory fees and fines, mainly due to higher applications for building certificates and regulatory fees and permit fees income and higher than anticipated infringement income of $837K. The lower year to date statutory fees and fines income at 31 March 2019 when compared to the year to date budget are as a result of issues with Fines Victoria’s (State Government entity) implementation of a new IT system leading to delays in infringement income being passed on to Council. ?$264K higher than budgeted user fees, predominantly due to increased demand for the Learn to Swim program and casual patronage $312K, higher than anticipated patronage at the transfer station $170K and higher than budgeted building permit applications due to increased development $492K. These are offset by lower than budgeted child care services fees due to the closure of the Grosvenor Child Care Centre ($595K).?$5.0M higher than budgeted monetary contributions. The timing of the receipt of contributions can vary depending on the level of development activity.?$5.3M higher than budgeted capital grants, predominantly due to unbudgeted grants received for the development of female friendly change rooms at Bert Healey Pavilion $180K, Roads to Recovery funding $233K, Living Libraries Infrastructure Program funding $750K and forecast Commonwealth Government funding for the Percy Treyvaud Masterplan implementation project $4.0M. ?$762K higher than budgeted other income, due to unbudgeted recycling funding received from the State Government $92K, unbudgeted legal case settlement $173K, State Government cost recoveries for the Valuations function $433K, six months rental income unbudgeted from a property acquisition $75K, and unbudgeted cost recoveries from the Victorian Building Authority for cladding inspections $91K. These favourable income variances are partially offset by:?$363K lower than budgeted rates income, predominantly due to supplementary rates being lower than anticipated. ?$46K lower than budgeted operating grants, predominantly due to the cessation of the Adult Day Activities program due to an end in funding from the Department of Health and Human Services. Operating ExpenditureFull year operating expenditure is forecast to be $561K favourable as a result of:?Materials and Services are forecast to be $640K lower than budget due to lower costs associated with traffic control measures $212K, savings in property maintenance costs $199K, savings from the discontinued Adult Day Activity service (ADASS) program $161K and reduced public lighting costs due to the benefits of Council’s ongoing energy efficient street lighting replacement program $102K.?$478K lower than budgeted borrowing costs (interest expense), as a result of planned loan borrowings being undertaken in December 2018 (was originally budgeted for July 2018).?$435K lower than budgeted depreciation, due to the timing of the completion and capitalisation of the capital works program.?$96K lower than budgeted other expenses, predominantly as a result of rental expense savings in the Maternal Health and Child Health unit due to alternative accommodation arrangements.?$1.1M higher than budgeted operating initiatives, mainly due to an increased roll-out of the energy efficient street lighting conversion program ($562K) - the program leads to environmental and financial benefits over the long term and increased provision of security services to ensure community and staff safety ($309K).Capital Works Expenditure – Full Year ForecastThe full year forecast net Capital Works expenditure (excluding Operating Initiatives) at 31 March 2019 is $85.9M. This includes the following key projects:?Toorak/South Yarra Library Air Conditioner Plant and refurbishment $1.6M,?Prahran Market – North East Corner Development $1.0M,?Local Road refurbishment and resurfacing $3.9M,?Yarra River Biodiversity Project $1.5M,?Drainage renewals $1.5M, ?Cato Street redevelopment $42.2M,?Gardiner Park redevelopment $2.9M,?Percy Treyvaud Masterplan implementation $790K,?Princess Gardens Masterplan implementation $1.1M,?Pavilion Redevelopment – Dunlop Pavilion $2.6M,?Strategic property purchases for open space $9.1M,?Toorak Park Masterplan Implementation $593K,?Windsor Siding Masterplan $450K,?Prahran Town Hall Masterplan implementation $263K,?Forrest Hill Public Realm $700K,?Cycling Strategy – Major Shared Paths Renewal $600K,?Tennis Facility redevelopments $483K,?Floodlighting Development Program $579K.The year to date capital expenditure is $56.9M. This equates to 62% of the full year forecast. Full year net capital expenditure (excluding Operating Initiatives) is forecast to be $85.9M compared to the net original budget of $101.0M. Capital works carry-overs and deferrals to 2019/20 are currently estimated at $15.2M (including the Cato Street redevelopment project $5.9M; Prahran Town Hall Masterplan development $4.4M; Percy Treyvaud Masterplan implementation $1.2M; Harold Holt Swim Centre Masterplan $2.9M, Toorak Park Masterplan implementation $407K, Princes Close redevelopment $200K, Righetti Sportsground flood lighting $180K and the Art acquisition program $62K).Cash FlowTotal cash and investments are $129.8M at 31 March 2019. The cash and investments balance is forecast to be $108.1M at 30 June 2019 which is $27.5M greater than budgeted.The attachment provides Council with the following:?Income Statement to 31 March 2019?Full Year Forecast Major Variance Analysis as at 31 March 2019?Balance Sheet as at 31 March 2019?Cash Flow Statement as at 31 March 2019?Financial Performance Indicators to 31 March 2019?Capital Works Expenditure Report as at 31 March 2019.Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.Council Financial Report for the period ending 31 March 2019Excluded RecommendationThat Council receives and notes the Financial Report for Stonnington City Council for the period ending 31 March 2019. 8.Appointment of Authorised Officers pursuant to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 - Statutory PlanningActing Manager Statutory Planning: Hannah McBride-Burgess General Manager Planning & Amenity: Stuart Draffin PurposeThe purpose of this report is to recommend that Council approve new Instruments of Authorisation to various staff members.BackgroundSection 224 of the Local Government Act 1989 and numerous other Acts and Regulations require that authorised officers (Council staff or the staff of contractors) be appointed for the purposes of the administration and enforcement of any Act, regulations or local laws which relate to the functions and powers of the Council.Authorisations are reviewed regularly and are updated due to:a)Appointment of new staff;b)changes in the names of Acts;c)the introduction, amendment or revocation of legislation;d)changes in position titles; ande)changes in roles.In most cases, the authorisations are approved by the Chief Executive Officer, but the Planning and Environment Act 1987 specifically requires that authorisations under that Act be issued by resolution of the Council and sealed.As a result of staff departures and recent appointments, it is recommended that new authorisations pursuant to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 be approved. Following is an updated list of the people required to be authorised in the Statutory Planning Unit. Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.PA - S11A - Appointment of Officers under P&E ActExcluded Recommendation1.That the attached Instrument of Authorisation pursuant to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 from Council to:a)Evette Shomali;b)Natalie O’Leary;c)Patricia Stewart;d)Georgina Strachan;e)Angela Belleville; and f)Kerri Young be approved and sealed. 9.S6 Instrument of Delegation from Council to Organisational RolesCivic Support Officer: Judy Hogan Manager Governance & Corporate Support: Fabienne ThewlisGeneral Manager Corporate Services: Geoff Cockram PurposeThe purpose of this report is to recommend that Council approve a new Instrument of Delegation from the Council to various positions in the organisation.BackgroundSection 98 of the Local Government Act 1989 (“the Act”) provides that a council may, by Instrument of Delegation, delegate to a member of staff, any power, duty or function of the Council under the Act or any other Act, other than some powers (such as adoption of the budget), that are reserved for Council decision. The delegations are made to the position rather than to the staff member occupying the position.Delegations are essential to enable Council staff to carry out operational duties particularly in areas which involve enforcement, such as town planning, local laws, environmental health, animal management and parking control. The current delegation from Council to various positions in the organisation was approved on 3 September 2018.The proposed delegation (Refer Attachment 1) is based on a document prepared by Council’s solicitors and is similar to that used by many Victorian municipalities. The proposed amendments to the delegations reflect changes in organisation titles. There are no relevant changes required as a result of legislative amendments, nevertheless the delegations referred to must be approved by Council as distinct from some others which can be delegated by the Interim Chief Executive OfficerAccordingly, it is recommended that Council revoke the existing delegations and approve new delegations to members of staff by position title.Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.s6 Instrument of Delegation Council to Organisational Roles Attachment 1 of 1Excluded RecommendationThat the attached Instrument of Delegation from Council to various positions in the organisational structure be adopted and sealed. o)Confidential1.Request Ministerial InterventionActing Manager City Strategy: Anthony De PasqualeConfidential report circulated separately.2.Status Report: Chief Executive Officer AppointmentInterim Chief Executive Officer: Simon ThomasConfidential report circulated separately. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download