Agenda of Council Meeting - 15 April 2019



Council MeetingNotice PaperMonday 15 April 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 15 April 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 1 April 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.Draft 2019/20 Budget and Draft Strategic Resource Plan 2019/20 to 2022/23 PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7104 \h 11 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 2.Planning Application 0431/18 - 112 Kooyong Road Armadale - Construction of a multi dwelling development in a General Residential Zone PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7089 \h 15 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 3.Planning Application 0878/18 - 1/657 Chapel Street, South Yarra - Sale and supply of liquor (On Premises Licence) for a tavern in conjunction with the use of the premises as a beauty salon (as of right) in an Activity Centre Zone PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7092 \h 43 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 4.Planning Application 1054/18 - 11-13 Wilson Street, South Yarra VIC 3141 – construction of a 10 storey commercial building plus basement car parking for 20 vehicles PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7091 \h 61 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 5.Planning Application 1330/16 - 5-15 Willoby Avenue Glen Iris- Buildings and works to a section 2 use (Education Centre) in a General Residential Zone and Heritage Overlay PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7090 \h 85 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 6.Caroline Gardens - Hit Up Wall PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7100 \h 99 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 7.Power House Rowing Club Lease Renewal PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7096 \h 107 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 8.Floodlight Trial at Romanis Reserve and Malvern Cricket Ground PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7097 \h 111 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 9.Burke Road, Glen Iris - Proposal to Alter Parking Restrictions PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7101 \h 115 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 10.Public Art Commissions - Cato Square PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7095 \h 123 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 11.Re-purposing of the Chadstone Girl Guide Hall, Malvern East PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7094 \h 127 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 12.Car Share Services - Extension of Licence PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7103 \h 129 SEQ SeqListGB \* CHARFORMAT 13.Use of Council Venue for Public Meeting PAGEREF PDF2_ReportName_7093 \h 133 SEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATn)Urgent BusinessSEQ SeqList \* alphabetic \* MERGEFORMATo)Confidential Business RecommendationThat the Council confirms the Minutes of the Council Meeting of the Stonnington City Council held on 1 April 2019 as an accurate record of the proceedings. m)General Business1.Draft 2019/20 Budget and Draft Strategic Resource Plan 2019/20 to 2022/23Manager Finance: Jon Gorst General Manager Corporate Services: Geoff Cockram PurposeTo receive the Draft 2019/20 Budget and Strategic Resource Plan 2019/20 to 2022/23. Under the Local Government Act 1989, Council is required to give public notice that the budget is available for inspection and to consider submissions received in respect of the budget prior to its adoption. (Please note that the budget and strategic resource plan documents are not released into the public domain until the full budget papers have been accepted by Council for advertising).BackgroundSection 127 of the Local Government Act 1989 (“the Act”) requires Council to prepare and adopt an annual budget. Section 126 of the Local Government Act 1989 requires Council to review the four year Strategic Resource Plan annually. Council’s high level Long Term Financial Plan (incorporating the Strategic Resource Plan 2019/20 to 2022/23) has been reviewed to assist Council in adopting a budget within a financially responsible longer term framework. The key objective of the Financial Plan is to maintain financial sustainability and stability in the long term, while achieving Council’s strategic objectives as outlined in the Council Plan.DiscussionThe Draft 2019/20 Budget has been developed through a comprehensive process of consultation and review. Council undertook an online community engagement program at the commencement of the budget process. During October and November 2018 feedback was sought from the Stonnington community to assist in the budget development. Council asked the community "What would you like Council to fund in the 2019/20 budget?". Council received many innovative ideas from the community. The commitments outlined in the budget document are in response to the feedback gathered through consultation and through Councillor Workshops and briefings with Councillors.Council undertook an extensive review of expenditure throughout the development of this budget. The draft budget is financially responsible, enables the achievement of the Annual Plan objectives and funds the strategies in the adopted Council Plan 2017-2021.The budget proposes a financially sustainable operating surplus for 2019/20 which is based on an average general rate increase of 2.5%. This is in accordance with the average rate cap determined by the Minister for Local Government in December 2018. User fees and charges have been reviewed in line with market rates, with any increases budgeted at manageable and sustainable levels to maintain cost recovery and to ensure potential usage will not be affected. The Draft 2019/20 Budget maintains and improves the current levels of service to the community and also provides funding for new initiatives to deliver on the Council Plan 2017-2021.The total capital works program is proposed to be $83.5 million. This includes $15.2 million of projects that will be carried over from the 2018/19 year. Of the total capital works program $27.1 million is dedicated to the maintenance and renewal of $3 billion of community assets.The program includes a number of major projects including funding for the completion of the Cato Street redevelopment incorporating a community plaza / park and a multi-level underground car park, strategic property acquisitions to create open space for the community, the Prahran Town Hall community and civic facilities redevelopment, the Percy Treyvaud Masterplan implementation, the Harold Holt Swim Centre Masterplan implementation, the Toorak Park Masterplan implementation, the Chapel Street Streetscape Masterplan implementation, a tennis facilities renewal program, the Princes Gardens Masterplan implementation, the Yarra River and Gardiners Creek Bio-Diversity Project, the Forrest Hill Masterplan implementation and the Windsor Siding Masterplan implementation.The capital works program also continues to maintain, renew and develop the City’s critical road, drainage, footpath and recreational infrastructure consistent with Council’s established strategies.The Draft 2019/20 Budget and Strategic Resource Plan are framed around ensuring that there is sufficient cash and investments to cover Council’s cash reserves (such as the open space reserve), trust funds and deposits. Council’s future fund reserve will continue to grow over the life of the Strategic Resource Plan to sustainably provide Council with continued financial capacity to respond to strategic property acquisition and strategic development opportunities from its own cash reserves as much as possible.Major Features?Maintenance of service levels while funding new initiatives to deliver on the Council Plan 2017-2021.?A comprehensive capital works program of $83.5 million. Planned borrowings of $17.0 million will assist in funding major projects in 2019/20.?The $83.5 million capital works program includes:? Percy Treyvaud Masterplan implementation ($14.4 million) - includes $1.2 million carried forward from 2018/19? Completion of the redevelopment of the Cato Street car park into a 10,000 sqm new urban open space ($10.3 million) - includes $5.9 million carried forward from 2018/19? Strategic property acquisitions to increase open space ($10.0 million)? Roads, footpaths and drainage works ($10.0 million)? Prahran Town Hall Masterplan implementation and redevelopment ($7.6 million) - includes $4.4 million carried forward from 2018/19? Community Building renewal and improvement works ($5.3 million)? Parks, open space and recreation renewal and improvement works ($3.9 million) – includes $0.2 million carried forward from 2018/19? Harold Holt Swim Centre Masterplan implementation ($2.9 million) - carried forward from 2018/19? Toorak Park and Victory Square Masterplan implementation ($1.9 million) - includes $0.4 million carried forward from 2018/19? Chapel Street Streetscape Masterplan implementation ($1.8 million)? Prahran Market utilities infrastructure works ($1.4 million)? Tennis Facility Renewal program ($1.3 million)? Princes Gardens Masterplan implementation ($1.0 million)? Yarra River and Gardiners Creek Biodiversity project ($1.0 million)? Forrest Hill Masterplan implementation ($0.8 million)? Windsor Siding Masterplan implementation ($0.7 million)? Cycling strategy implementation ($0.6 million)? Building and facility energy efficiency program ($0.5 million).?The proposed capital works program also allows for an expanded tree planting program to deliver on Council’s Urban Forest Strategy. Funding for tree planting across the Municipality will increase by $0.24 million to $0.8 million.?A financially sustainable operating surplus which will be used to partly fund the $83.5 million capital works program.?Average general rates will increase by 2.5% as determined by the Minister for Local Government. This equates to an average increase of approximately $35 per annum (or 67 cents per week).The Draft 2019/20 Budget (and associated Draft Strategic Resource Plan) is financially responsible and provides for a comprehensive range of services for the community, funds an $83.5 million capital works program and is in line with the State Government rate cap of 2.5%.Human Rights ConsiderationThe Draft 2019/20 Budget and Draft Strategic Resource Plan 2019/20 to 2022/23 meet the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.Draft Budget 2019-20To be circulated 2.Draft Strategic Resource Plan 2019-20 to 2022-23To be circulated RecommendationThat Council:1. receives the Draft 2019/20 Budget and Draft Strategic Resource Plan 2019/20 to 2022/23;2.gives public notice in accordance with Section 129 of the Local Government Act 1989 that Council has prepared a proposed budget for the 2019/20 year and of its intention to adopt the budget at its meeting to be held on Monday 3 June 2019;3.invites submissions on the proposed budget in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 by 5.00pm Wednesday 15 May 2019;4.appoints a Committee of all Councillors to consider and hear any submissions on Monday 27 May 2019 at 6.00pm; and5.directs the Committee to report its findings and recommendations to Council at its meeting on Monday 3 June 2019. 2.Planning Application 0431/18 - 112 Kooyong Road Armadale - Construction of a multi dwelling development in a General Residential ZoneManager Statutory Planning: Alexandra Kastaniotis General Manager Planning & Amenity: Stuart Draffin PURPOSEFor Council to consider a planning application for construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential Zone at 112 Kooyong Road, Armadale. Executive SummaryApplicant:Ratio Consultants Pty LtdWard:South WardZone:General Residential Zone- Schedule 10Overlay:NilNeighbourhood Precinct: Garden Suburban 3Date lodged:27 April 2018Date revised05 February 2019Statutory days: (as at council meeting date)69Trigger for referral to Council:Seven or more objections and Councillor call upNumber of objections:32Consultative Meeting:Yes– held on 04 September 2018Officer 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 Rob Mills Architecture and are known as File No. 431/18, Drawing No.s: TP.01, TP.02, TP.03, TP.04, TP.10, TP.11, TP.12, TP.13, TP.14, TP.20, TP.22, TP.30, TP.31, TP.32, TP.40, TP.41, TP.42, TP.43, TP.44, TP.45, TP.46, TP.50 and Council date stamped 05 February 2019.Landscape Concept Plans dated 01 February 2019 TP01, TP02, TP03, TP04, TP05, TP06 and Council date stamped 05 February 2019 prepared by Jack Merlo Design and Landscape have also been submitted.The application was revised after the consultative meeting and the advertised plans have been superseded by the plans Council date stamped 05 February 2019. In summary, the amendments to the plans have been made to facilitate greater opportunity for in ground planting; to increase the setbacks from the side and rear boundaries at all levels; and to reduce the overall building height. Details of all of the changes are included under the “Advertising” section of the report.The development will involve the demolition of the existing dwelling on the subject site and the construction of a three storey apartment building comprising five x three bedroom dwellings.Key features of the proposal are:?Demolition of the existing building and swimming pool on the subject site (no permit required).?Basement car parking:-A total of 11 car parking spaces are provided.-Two car parking spaces are allocated to apartments 1, 2, 3 and 4. Three car parking spaces are allocated to apartment 5.-A bin storage room and a storage room associated with storage for each apartment is proposed.-Provision of three (3) bicycle spaces within the storage room.-The existing vehicle crossing is proposed to be removed and a crossover is proposed further north of the existing crossover.?The ground floor level includes two x three bedroom apartments.?The first floor level includes two x three bedroom apartments.?The second floor level includes one x three bedroom apartment.?Pedestrian access is via a pathway from Kooyong Road along the southern boundary, leading to an entry foyer with one lift.?Private open space for each apartment will be provided in the form of terraces varying in size between 13.09 square metres and 35.17 square metres.?The building presents a contemporary architectural style. Materials and finishes include a combination of metal window frames and privacy screens, concrete and render finish and clear windows and balustrades?The development will result in 56.8% site coverage at ground, 72% site coverage at basement, 39.6% garden area and 19.3% permeability.?The maximum height of the building will be 9.69m above natural ground level.Site and SurroundsThe site is located on the east side of Kooyong Road, approximately 260 metres to the north of High Street. The site has the following significant characteristics:?Rectangular allotment with a frontage to Kooyong Road of 20.7m, a site depth of 45.72 m, a rear boundary of 20.66 metres and yielding an overall site area of 945m2.?The land has a fall from east to west of approximately 1.5 metres.?The land is developed with a double storey brick veneer dwelling with a swimming pool located at the rear of the site.?Vehicle access is provided via a single width crossover on the northern side of the site.?A 1.8 metre high painted brick front fence is located on the Kooyong Road Frontage.?There are a number of mature street trees in front of the subject site.The wider area is residential in nature and displays a mixed character in terms of building scale and architectural style, including single detached dwellings on large allotments, 1970’s and more contemporary apartment buildings and townhouses. Development heights on Kooyong Road are generally two to three storey. Heights of front fences in Kooyong Road vary with the nearby properties exhibiting fences between heights of 900mm to 2.2 metres. Directly to the north of the subject site at no. 114 Kooyong Road is a three storey 1970’s apartment building constructed of brick. The building is comprised of 11 dwellings and includes a sheer three-storey wall to its southern elevation fronting the subject site.A six dwelling and two-storey townhouse development is located to the south of the subject site at No. 110 Kooyong Road. The townhouse development includes basement car parking and two storey townhouses above. The parapet height of the front dwelling facing Kooyong Road is of 8.74 metres. The townhouse development features secluded private open space areas and habitable room windows on the northern side of the development facing the subject site.To the east of the subject site at No. 6 Flete Avenue is a large property comprising a modern double storey dwelling with a large secluded private open space area and swimming pool at the rear of the site that abuts the subject site. The property is located within Heritage Overlay- Schedule 38 and the building itself is not significant, however the subject land was previously associated with the significant building at No. 10-24 Flete Avenue. A tall hedge extends along the west boundary of the site, abutting the rear of the subject site.To the west, is Kooyong Road. A pedestrian crossing is located outside the subject site and on the opposite side of Kooyong Road is a large double storey dwelling and an early learning Centre.Previous Planning Application(s)A search of Council records indicates the following relevant planning applications:?A Notice Of Refusal for Planning Application 455/14 was issued on 21 May 2015 for ‘Construction of a multi- dwelling development in a General Residential Zone’. The application sought construction of a three storey apartment building comprising 8 dwellings (6x 2 bed plus study and 2x2 bedroom). The grounds of refusal were:-The proposal is an overdevelopment of the site, and does not respect the character of the area and is therefore at odds with a number of provisions of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, including the relevant State and Local Polices and the Neighbourhood Character Objective of Clause 55.-The proposal fails to provide an appropriate landscape response and is at odds with a number of provisions of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, including the relevant State and Local Polices and the Landscaping Objectives of Clause 55.-The proposed street setback is at odds with the Street Setbacks Objective of Clause 55.-The proposal will result in unreasonable visual bulk impacts to neighbouring properties and is at odds with the Side and Rear Setbacks Objective of Clause 55.-The proposal will result in unreasonable daylight obstruction to neighbouring windows and sunlight obstruction to neighbouring north facing windows and is at odds with the Daylight to Existing Windows Objective and the North Facing Windows Objective of Clause 55.-The proposal will result in unreasonable overlooking to neighbouring properties and is at odds with the Overlooking Objective of Clause 55.-The proposed ground floor level sits too low relative to natural ground level on the side and rear boundaries and will result in a poor level of amenity to the internal areas and open space of Dwellings A2 and A3.-The proposed ground floor level sits too low relative to natural ground level on the side and rear boundaries and will result in an unacceptable flooding risk.The application was appealed to VCAT, however was withdrawn on 05 November 2015.The TitleThe site is described on Certificate of Title Volume 04573 Folio 585 / Title Plan 723698J 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 (Schedule 10) Pursuant to Clause 32.08-2 a permit is not required to use the land for dwellings. Pursuant to Clause 32.08-6, a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot and a front fence that exceeds a height of 1.5m. A development must meet the requirements of Clause 55.The Zone requires that an application to construct a residential building on a lot greater than 650sqm in area must provide a minimum garden area of 35% of the site. The plans confirm 39% of the site will be provided as garden area. In addition, a residential building must not exceed a height of 10m on a sloping site. The development has a height of 9.69 metres and contains 3 storeys.Schedule 10 varies the following ResCode Standards:StandardRequirementSite coverageA5 and B8Basements should not exceed 75% of the site area.Landscaping B13In addition to the requirements of B13, at least one canopy tree should be planted on the site.Side and rearSetbacksA10 and B17For a distance of at least 5 metres behind the front facade of the building fronting the street, setback new buildings (including basements) a minimum of 2 metres from at least one side boundary and at least 1 metre from the other side boundary up to 3.6 metres in height.Where no setback is specified, standard A10 or B17 applies.Walls on boundariesA11 and B18Walls should not be located on side boundaries for a distance of 5 metres behind the front fa?ade of the building fronting the street.Overlay:None. Particular Provisions:Clause 52.06 – Car ParkingPursuant to Clause 52.06-2, the car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided on the land prior to the commencement of a new use. Pursuant to Clause 52.06-5, a dwelling requires:?1 car space to each one or two bedroom dwelling; ?2 car spaces to each three or more bedroom dwelling. ?0 car space for visitors to every 5 dwellings for the development of 5 or more dwelling.Each new dwelling contains 3 more bedrooms and is provided between 2 and 3 car parking spaces. The 5 new dwellings are required to provide a total of 10 car spaces, 2 to each new dwelling. The proposal provides 11 car parking spaces, with 2 spaces allocated to each apartment and 3 spaces to dwelling no. 5, exceeding the statutory requirements by 1 space. It is noted that as a result of amendment VC148 which was gazetted into the planning scheme on 31 August 2018 (after advertising of this application) there is no longer a requirement for visitor car parking spaces associated with the proposed residential development. Clause 55 – Two dwellings on a lot and residential buildingsA development:?Must meet all of the objectives of this clause.?Should meet all of the standards of this clause.Relevant Planning Policies?Clause 9 Plan Melbourne?Clause 11 Settlement?Clause 15 Built Environment and Heritage?Clause 16 Housing?Clause 21.02 Overview?Clause 21.03 Vision?Clause 21.05 Housing?Clause 21.06 Built Environment and Heritage?Clause 22.05 Environmentally Sustainable Design?Clause 22.18 Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design)?Clause 22.23 Neighbourhood Character Policy?Clause 32.08 General Residential Zone?Clause 52.06 Car Parking?Clause 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot?Clause 65 Decision 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 one sign on the site. The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily.The site is located in South Ward and objections from 32 different properties have been received. The concerns can be summarised as follows:?Building Height?Street Setback?Car parking and traffic?No visitor car parking provided?Neighbourhood Character?Design Detail?Overlooking?North facing windows?Neighbourhood Character?Landscaping?Impact on property values?Visual Bulk?Overshadowing?Heritage?Noise?Impact on significant trees?Waste Collection by Council is inappropriate?Side and rear setbacks?Daylight to existing windows?Drainage and flooding issues?OverdevelopmentA Consultative Meeting was held on 19 September 2018. The meeting was attended by Councillors Stefanopolous and Hindle, representatives of the applicant, objectors and two Council Planning Officers. Following the consultative meeting revised plans were submitted to Council on 05 February 2019 and the plans included but were not limited to the following changes:Basement?The basement site coverage reduced from 74.4% to 72%.?The setback of the basement from the rear (eastern) boundary increased from 1.335 metres to 1.545 metres, setback from the southern boundary increased from between 1.0 metre to 1.65 to 2.0 metres and setback from the northern boundary increased from 0.8 metres to 0.9 metres.Ground Floor?Both of the terraces of apartment no. 2 reduced in size and an additional canopy tree planted within the north eastern corner of the site.?The setback of the wall from the southern boundary increased from 3.345 metres to 3.645 metres.?The setback of the lobby from the southern boundary increased to 1.0 metres.?The portico over the entry removed.First Floor?The setback of the first floor from the southern boundary increased from 3.345 metres to 3.645 metres.?The removal of the terrace to apartment 3 on the south elevation and replaced with planter boxes.?The terrace on the northern side of apartment 3 reduced in size and additional planter box incorporated to this area.?The setback of the first floor from the rear (eastern) boundary increased from a minimum of 2.615 metres to a minimum of 3.615 metres.Second Floor?The setback of the second floor from the southern boundary increased an additional 150 millimetres from 6.295 metres to 6.445 metres.?The setback of the second floor from the rear (eastern) boundary increased from between 3.635 metres to 4.56 metres to 6.03- 6.75 metres. ?The deletion of the terraces from the northern and southern boundaries.?The side stair wall cut at an angle.?A reduction in the extent of planter boxes.All Levels?Reduction in the floor to ceiling height to each level from 3.0 metres to 2.9 metres.?The overall building height reduced an additional 400 millimetres from 9.95 metres to 9.55 metres.?Privacy screen detail amended.?Mesh in the colour burnt sienna added to the facades.?The height of the parapet to the building reduced an additional 100 millimetres.Public notification of the formally revised plans Council date stamped 05 February 2019 did not occur given the extent of changes as listed above result in an overall reduction in the building footprint. Therefore, the proposed changes would not result in any additional material detriment.ReferralsParks DepartmentCouncils Parks Department has reviewed the revised plans submitted to Council on 05 February 2019 and provided the following comments:Street Trees?A new crossover and water services are shown to be installed close to or within the structural root zone(SRZ) of both street trees. Conditions relating to works within the SRZ’s of both trees / tree bonds for tree 1 will need to be considered for this application.?Total value for tree 1 (Platanus x acerifolia) $13,178.Built Form?The basement size / built form results in minimal above and below ground space with which to establish large landscape elements along the northern and southern aspects of the site. If the basement was reduced in size to the north, then the existing stand of maturing Blueberry Ash trees could be retained, which already create a dense screen between the 112 & 114 Kooyong Road. Landscape Plan?The landscape plan reflects the available space provided by the built form. Large elements can be accommodated within the front and rear setbacks.?The Jacaranda being retained within the rear setback will require a TMP.Planner Response: The setbacks at basement and ground floor level are sufficient to allow some of the existing Blueberry Ash trees on the northern boundary to be retained to address the concerns raised by Councils Arborist. To ensure that some of the existing vegetation on the northern boundary is retained, the following condition will be included:?Arboriculture assessment of existing vegetation along the northern boundary to determine the retention value and TPZ’s for each tree and the vegetation identified within the arborist report to be worthy of retention shown on the landscape plan. All other conditions in regard to the tree bond and works within the SRZ of each tree will be included.InfrastructureCouncils Infrastructure Department has reviewed the advertised material. No objection was raised by Council’s Infrastructure Department, subject to the following conditions:?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. As required by the Building Regulations, 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. ?Prior to an ‘Occupancy Permit’ being issued, a suitably qualified Engineer must carry out a detailed inspection of the completed stormwater drainage system and associated works including all water storage tanks and detention (if applicable) to ensure that all works has been constructed in accordance with the approved design and the relevant planning permit conditions. Certification of the completed drainage from the Engineer must be provided to Council prior to a ‘Statement of Compliance’ being issued for the subdivision.?The existing footpath levels must not be lowered or altered in any way at the property line (to facilitate the basement ramp). ?The applicant must at their cost provide a stormwater detention system to restrict runoff from the development to no greater than the existing runoff based on a 1 in 10 A.R.I. to the satisfaction of Council’s Infrastructure Unit. Alternatively, in lieu of the stand-alone detention system, the owner may provide stormwater tanks that are in total 2,000 litres greater than those tanks required to satisfy WSUD requirements for the development. Those tanks must be connected to all toilets. Transport and Parking DepartmentCouncils Transport and Parking Department has reviewed the advertised material and raised the following concerns:?As vegetation is proposed to be planted within the sight distance triangles, a condition should be included on any permit issued that the height of any vegetation within the sight distance triangles be limited to 0.9m in height.?The plans do not include the garage door width for any garage, however they appear generally satisfactory. The applicant should confirm that a minimum 4.8m is available for the double garages, and a minimum 7.2m is available for the triple garage.?The plans submitted do not detail the proposed floor gradients of the entire parking area. The minimum gradient of the parking area shall be 1:100 (1.0%) for outdoor areas and 1:200 (0.5%) for covered areas to allow for adequate drainage as per AS 2890.1.?The proposed crossing has not been dimensioned, but the design broadly appears reasonable. The applicant should indicate whether 1.3m straight splays will be included on both sides, to assist with access, but to also set back on-street parking. Planner Response: The revised plans addressed some of the issues raised by Council’s Traffic Engineers. Conditions will be included on any permit issued to address the outstanding issues.Environmental Sustainable Design (ESD)Councils ESD advisor has reviewed the revised plans submitted to Council on 05 February 2019 and raised the following concerns:?Building User Guide Credit claimed in the Built Environment Sustainability Scorecard tool. However, no information has been provided as to what the Building User Guide should contain particularly in relation to Environmental Sustainable Design items. This issue should be addressed to ensure appropriateness of the Building User Guide.?Shading aspects have not been addressed and are required particularly to northern (in the form of fixed shading) and western facades (operable shading such as shutters) to minimise solar heat gain.?The number of toilets connected to the rainwater tank should be confirmed on plans. This aspect is still outstanding and must be annotated.?Plans now show that a cycle parking space has been provided for each unit in the basement. However, the sizing of the alcove allocated for Unit 4 cycle parking should be confirmed to ensure it is sufficiently sized to meet requirements.?Visitor cycle parking has been located in the entry path leading to the building. However, as the entry path is the minimum permissible (1.2m width), it is likely that cycle parking will obstruct entry to the building for large items including wheelchairs or furniture. An alternative more suitable location should be sought. Where no suitable location is available, provision of visitor cycle parking should be removed from plans, Sustainable Design Assessment and the Built Environment Sustainability Scorecard tool credits.?BESS credits have been claimed for the provision of solar panels and low VOC paints which are not considered innovative in a Victorian context. These should be removed.Planner Response:Conditions will be included on any permit issued to address the above concerns.Waste Council’s Waste Management Department provided no objection to the proposal subject to conditions being placed on any permit issued.Urban DesignCouncil’s Urban Designer reviewed the advertised material and provided the following comments.?Despite the building being set within a deep excavation to the rear, the building presents an appreciable degree of visual bulk to the rear private open space of the neighbouring property at No.6 Flete Avenue. It is suggested that the rear setback of the upper level be increased to address this issue. ?The extent of the basement to the side boundaries and to the rear is excessive and does not provide sufficient space for meaningful in-ground canopy-tree perimeter landscaping; and is contrary to the Neighbourhood Character policy at Clause 22.23. The width of the basement should be reduced to enable adequate space for meaningful in-ground landscaping. Planner Response:The revised plans have addressed the concerns raised by Council’s Urban Designer by increasing the rear setback at all levels to reduce the visual bulk and through improving the landscaping opportunities along the permitter of the site. KEY ISSUESStrategic ContextThe overarching policies and objectives at both a State and local level encourage urban consolidation in established urban areas and medium density residential development in and around neighbourhood activity centres and close to public transport. These strategies call for well-designed medium-density development that respects neighbourhood character, improves housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency.Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) identifies the site as being within an “incremental change area”. These areas (outside of the Heritage Overlay and Neighbourhood Character Overlay), are encouraged to direct multi-unit development (2-3 storeys) to lots capable of accommodating increased density. The subject site is 945m2 in area and is located within the Principal Public Transport Network Area being only 250m from High Street which is serviced by the No. 6 tram and Malvern Road which is serviced by the 72 tram. The proximity of the site to public transport and the Glenferrie Road and High Street activity centre affirms that this land is capable of accommodating increased density. Furthermore, the design represents an appropriate infill response and achieves a high degree of integration with the evolving streetscape of predominantly 2-3 storey dwellings and apartment buildings. Neighbourhood CharacterThe subject site falls within the Garden Suburban 3 Neighbourhood Character Precinct (at Clause 22.23) which includes the following statement of preferred neighbourhood character:The Garden Suburban 3 precinct comprises spacious and leafy streetscapes with Victorian, Edwardian, Interwar or Post-war era and new buildings set in established garden surrounds. Generous, regular front and side setbacks provide space around buildings and allow for canopy trees. New buildings or additions offer innovative and contemporary design responses while complementing the key aspects of building form, one- two storey scale and design details of the older dwellings in the precinct. Low or permeable front fences retain views to gardens and buildings from the street. Areas within a Residential Growth or Mixed Use Zone or within a substantial change area will accommodate more development with a more compact setting but with spaces for canopy trees and other vegetation and high quality responsive design.The design guidelines that seek to achieve this character are:?To encourage the retention of intact, period dwellings that contribute to the character of the area.?To ensure new buildings and extensions do not dominate the streetscape.?To encourage a high quality of building detailing that references, without mimicking, the details of buildings in the area.?To maintain and reinforce the rhythm and spacing between and around buildings.?To maintain and strengthen the garden settings of buildings and the tree canopy of the neighbourhood.?To prevent the loss of front garden space and the dominance of car parking structures.?To ensure fences complement the predominant style of front boundary treatment in the street and retain views to dwellings and gardens,The proposed development will adopt a maximum building height of 9.6 metres above natural ground level and will be three storeys in height, therefore the proposal complies with policy requirements for incremental change areas and meets the mandatory height limit of the Schedule to the Zone. The proposal will present as a large three storey residential development which is not dissimilar to other built form along Kooyong Road. However, the notion of neighbourhood character is a broad concept that is not confined to building height. The assessment has to go further to gauge how the proposed development will be experienced from a wider area.It is acknowledged that the proposed building extends deep into the land, however the depth of the proposed building is consistent with the depth of other buildings within the immediate context. More specifically the townhouses to the south of the subject site at No. 110 Kooyong Road extend to the rear title boundary of the site and the block of flats to the north of the subject site at No. 114 Kooyong Road has a rear setback that is consistent with the rear setback of the proposed development.The proposed design uses a variety of materials including render, concrete and mesh. Glazing and terraces are oriented towards the street which contributes to the activation of the public realm and promotes passive surveillance. The landscaping around the building will also contribute to the garden character of the neighbourhood and the vegetation will assist in softening the building bulk when viewed from the adjoining sites and the street.The proposed 1.8 metre high front fence is acceptable as it responds to the streetscape and character of the area. The fence is provided with indents for landscaping to help soften the built form presenting to the streetscape. The fence is consistent with the existing fence styles along Kooyong Road which comprise either dense landscape screening or solid painted render fences and is consistent with the 1.8 metre high brick fencing currently on site.Overall, it is considered that the design response, in terms of its presentation to key interfaces and incorporation of features of the surrounding area, and built form, will sit comfortably within the preferred character and emerging features of the surrounding area. Further, the proposal is considered to be a suitable response to the emerging streetscape character, as assessed against Clause 16.01 and Clause 21.06. For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is considered an appropriate response to the Neighbourhood Character Policy at Clause 22.23 and Standard B1 (Neighbourhood Character), B2 (Residential Policy), B5 (Integration with the Street), B31 (Design Detail) and B32 (Front Fences).Site Layout and Building MassingStreet SetbacksThe setbacks to the adjoining properties are 7.3 metres and 6.440 metres to the north and south respectively. Therefore, the proposed development should be setback 6.8 metres from Kooyong Road to comply with standard B6. The proposed development features the following minimum setbacks from Kooyong Road: 7.4-7.9 metres at ground floor level, 7.9- 8.5 metres at first floor with a 480 millimetre encroachment of the glass balustrade and 1.1 metre encroachment of the planter box, 8.1-8.5 metres measured to the edge of the terrace with a 500 millimetres encroachment of the planter box. Therefore, the street setbacks comply with the standard at Clause 55.03-1 (Street Setback).Building HeightThe proposed maximum building height is 9.55 metres. This complies with the requirements of Schedule 10 to the General Residential Zone that allows a maximum height of 10 metres given the site has the requisite slope in ground level. As the height of the building aligns with the surrounding built form and aligns with the built form of the block of flats to the north of the subject site it is considered to respect the existing and preferred neighbourhood character.Site Coverage and PermeabilityThe total lot size is 945 square metres. The maximum site coverage as specified in Standard A5 is 60% and Schedule 10 of the General Residential Zone stipulates 75% basement coverage. The proposed site coverage is 535.7 square metres (56.8%) and basement site coverage is 679.4 square metres (72%). Therefore, the site coverage complies with the standard at Clause 55.03-3 (Site coverage).The site permeability of 19.9% does not satisfy the minimum 20% as recommended by standard B9 (Permeability Objective). This will be addressed via a condition and can be achieved by reducing hard surfaces such as paving and utilising permeable pavers or the like, to improve on-site water retention.Energy EfficiencyThe Apartments have been designed with good access to natural light and ventilation and an acceptable level or internal amenity. All habitable rooms have an operable window to promote cross ventilation. The apartments have been oriented and designed to maximise direct sunlight and daylight access. The layout of the apartments within the development orientates the living/ dining areas with both an easterly or westerly aspect, and large windows have been included on the eastern and western elevations to these areas. Whilst the development includes some south facing bedrooms, they are all sufficiently setback from the southern boundary to ensure that they receive a good level of daylight access. In addition, all areas of private open space will receive adequate daylight and solar access.Clause 22.05 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme requires the development to achieve best practice in environmentally sustainable development. The applicant has submitted a Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA), detailing how the development addresses the 10 key sustainable design categories using the Built Environment Sustainability Scorecard (BESS). The submitted SDA shows that the development achieves a BESS score of 62% and a pass for each of the mandatory pass categories of Water, Energy, Stormwater and IEQ, which is satisfactory. It is noted that an updated SDA will need to be submitted to address the concerns raised by Council ESD advisor and plans submitted for endorsement. This will be required as a condition of any permit issued.Overall, the design of the development is deemed to achieve the broad energy efficiency Objectives of Standard B10.Safety The development is designed to provide for safety and security of residents. The pedestrian entrance to the development is separated from the driveway and is afforded passive surveillance. The development has been provided with a clearly identifiable entrance which will not be obscured or isolated from the street featuring a paved pathway on the southern side of the site leading to an entry lobby with a pebbled roof and skylight above. The entry has been designed with habitable room windows facing the pedestrian path also providing passive surveillance. This design response achieves the objectives of the standard.Landscaping Council’s MSS and various local policies emphasise the provision of high quality landscaping and seek to ensure that landscaping forms a key consideration of development proposals. Clause 21.06-2 (Landscape Character) seeks to ‘repair and reinforce the high quality landscape character of the City’. Further to this, Clause 22.23 (Neighbourhood Character Policy) seeks ‘to maintain and strengthen the garden settings of buildings and the tree canopy of the neighbourhood’. The policy further encourages a design response which ‘includes planting around the perimeter of the site to strengthen the garden setting’ and provides ‘setback basements from all property boundaries to allow for in-ground planting’. The proposal includes the retention of the Jacaranda tree within the south eastern setback of the site. The retention of this tree will assist in softening the built form of the building when viewed from the properties at 110 Kooyong Road and the dwelling at No. 6 Flete Avenue. A permit condition will require a Tree Management Plan to ensure the successful retention and protection of the tree.As per the Landscape Concept Plan prepared by Jack Merlo Landscape Architects three canopy trees are proposed on the site. This is greater than the number of existing canopy trees on the site. Landscaping is also proposed on the side boundaries in the form of Lilly Pillys, Evergreen Magnolia and Bay trees. Further, two canopy trees are proposed at the front of the site. The proposed landscape response will soften the presentation of the proposed development when viewed from the streetscape and adjoining lots Council’s Arborist commented that the existing Blueberry Ash Trees to the northern side of the development should be retained. It is noted that these trees are not significant trees, however are established trees. The applicant indicated that they would accept a condition of permit relating to an arboriculture report assessing the trees along the northern boundary to determine the retention value and an updated landscape plan to show the vegetation identified as being worthy of retention shown on the landscape plan.The plans and landscape plan show planter boxes on the first and second floor of the proposal however there is nothing on the plans to show how the planter boxes will be maintained. The applicant confirmed that the ongoing maintenance and management of external planters will be the responsibility of the body corporate, not individual apartment owners/tenants.? The applicant also indicated that the maintenance of planters will occur externally to the building, with the overall development to be serviced by a gardener that will be appointed by the body corporate.?It was also confirmed by the applicant that all planters are to be fitted with dripper irrigation on an automated system for all fa?ade planters. The planter boxed will be accessed twice yearly as part of the long-term maintenance schedule to be managed by the body corporate. A condition will be included on the permit to ensure the planter boxes are maintained.Subject to the conditions detailed above, the landscaping response for the subject site is an appropriate response to the garden character of the area and will ensure a standard of landscape integration is achieved.Access and Parking Location The existing single width vehicle crossing is proposed to be removed and reinstated with kerb and channel. A single width crossover is proposed further north of the existing crossover. There are no dimensions on the plans showing the width of the crossover and this will be required via a condition of permit. Nonetheless, it appears that the crossover is a width of 3.0 metres with 1.3 metre splays and therefore complies with Councils Vehicle Crossing Policy. The crossover occupies less than 33% of the site’s frontage as required by Standard B14 and therefore complies. The new basement car parking provides convenient parking for resident and visitor vehicles and is easily accessible from ground level. This complies with the Parking location objective of Clause 55.Amenity ImpactsSide and rear setbacks Schedule 10 to the General Residential Zone includes the following modified B17 Standard:The proposed development complies with the modified standard to B17 as at ground floor level the proposal is setback 1.35 metres from the northern boundary and 3.645 metres from the southern boundary.Standard B17 (side and rear setbacks) sets out numerical requirements for side and rear setbacks. The tables below illustrates how the proposal meets these requirements.NorthLocation Wall HeightSetback required by Standard B17Setback ProposedComplies?Ground Floor2.65 (max)1.02.2-2.6YFirst Floor6.1 (max)1.752.2-2.6YFirst Floor (Planter Box on northern side of the terrace to apartment 3)3.221.0575 millimetresN, Shortfall of 425 millimetres.Second Floor (Main bed of apartment 5)9.04.093.92N, Shortfall of 89 milimetres.Second Floor (Living room of apartment 5)9.64.694.28 N, Shortfall of 410 millimetres.Second Floor (Planter box on the northern side of the terrace to apartment 5)6.421.8462.22 minimumYAs outlined in the table above, there are some variations from the standard required at second floor level and first floor level where the planter box encroaches into the setback. The encroachment of the planter box into the setback is considered reasonable given that the planter boxes are an architectural feature that will soften the form of the development. it is considered that the degree of non-compliance will not result in any unreasonable detriment to the adjoining apartment building as there is no secluded private open space areas of the apartment building opposite that have a direct interface with the new building on the subject site. Also, as discussed in the assessment against Standard B19 (Daylight to existing windows), full compliance with B19 is achieved ensuring the windows on the apartment building to the north are adequately protected.SouthAs a result of the revised plans lodged with Council on 05 February 2019, the setback to the south have been increased at ground and first floor level by an additional 300 millimetres, at first floor level by an additional 1 metre and at second floor level by an additional 150 millimetres. The revised setback improves the amenity impacts i.e. overshadowing and north facing windows to the townhouses to the southern side of the site.Location Wall HeightSetback required by Standard B17Setback ProposedComplies?Ground Floor2.9 (max)1.03.645YGround floor (lobby)2.41.01.0YFirst Floor6.3 (max)1.813.645 YFirst Floor (Planter box on the southern side of the terrace to apartment 3)3.61.02.595YSecond Floor (Kitchen of apartment 5)9.6 4.696.445 YSecond Floor (Planter box on the southern side of apartment 5).6.91.993.465YEastAs a result of the revised plans lodged with Council on 05 February 2019, the setback to the east (rear) have been increased at first floor level by one metre and at second floor level the setbacks have been increased from 3.635 metres to 4.56 metres to 6.03- 6.75 metres. The setbacks proposed ensure that visual bulk to the dwelling at the rear at No. 6 Flete Avenue is minimised.Location Wall HeightSetback required by Standard B17Setback ProposedComplies?Ground Floor2.4 (max)1.03.9- 4.5 YFirst Floor5.8 (max)1.663.61-4.54 YSecond Floor 9.2 (max)4.296.03-6.75YThe proposed side and rear setbacks and the articulation of the building facades ensures that building bulk is not unreasonable and the development can be supported. The development complies with the side and rear setback objective of Clause 55.04-1.Daylight to Existing Windows The proposed development is located opposite habitable room windows of the adjoining dwellings to the north and south. The dwellings to the south at No. 110 Kooyong Road have two north facing habitable room windows, therefore an assessment of the proposal against these windows will be assessed against the north facing windows standard. The setbacks of the proposed development from the existing habitable room windows of No. 112 Kooyong Road opposite are assessed against the requirements of Standard B19 as follows.NorthLocation Wall HeightSetback required by Standard B19Setback ProposedComplies?Ground Floor2.65 (max)1.04.7(min)YFirst Floor6.1 (max)3.054.6YFirst Floor (Planter Box on northern side of the terrace to apartment 3)3.221.612.9YSecond Floor (Main bed of apartment 5)9.04.56.3YSecond Floor (Living room of apartment 5)9.64.86.69YSecond Floor (Planter box on the northern side of the terrace to apartment 5).6.423.214.5YThe setbacks are deemed to be acceptable as they comply with Standard B19 (Daylight to existing windows) and ensure that the habitable room windows of the block of flats to the north are adequately protected.North Facing Windows There are two north facing windows located within 3 metres of the subject site on the adjoining dwelling to the south at No.110 Kooyong Road. The windows to this dwelling are setback approximately two (2) metres from the common boundary. The setbacks of the proposed development from the existing north facing habitable room windows opposite are assessed against the requirements of Standard B20 as follows:SouthLocation Wall HeightSetback required by Standard B20Setback ProposedComplies?Ground2.91.03.645YFirst6.32.624.280YFirst Floor (Planter box on the southern side of the terrace to apartment 3)3.61.02.595YSecond Floor (Kitchen of apartment 5)9.65.686.445YSecond Floor (Planter box on the southern side of apartment 5).6.92.983.645YThe setbacks as shown on the revised plans are fully compliant with the standard at Clause 55.04-4 (North facing windows). OvershadowingStandard B21 of ResCode seeks to ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow the existing secluded private open space. Where sunlight to the secluded private open space of an existing dwelling is reduced, at least 40 square metres with minimum dimensions of 3 metres of the secluded private open space should receive at least five (5) hours of sunlight between 9am and 3pm at the September Equinox.The proposal will result in increased shadow to the secluded private open spaces areas of No. 6 Flete Avenue and No. 1/110 Kooyong Road. The additional shadow to No. 6 Flete Avenue is an additional 13.7m2 at 3pm. This impact is reasonable given that at least 40 square metres with a minimum dimension of 3 metres of the secluded private open spaces receives at least five hours of sunlight between 9am and 3pm on 22 September in accordance with Standard B21. The additional shadow to No. 1/110 Kooyong Road occurs at 9am, 10 am and 11am. The additional shadow is minimal and the impact of the additional shadow is reasonable given that at least 40 square metres with a minimum dimension of 3 metres of the secluded private open spaces receives at least five hours of sunlight between 9am and 3pm in accordance with Standard B21. Overlooking The key assessment tool to determine unreasonable overlooking is the Overlooking Objective, including Standard B22. The standard provides a 9 metre, 45 degree angle arc that determines unreasonable overlooking, and windows or balconies that are located in such a position must be screened to a height of 1.7m above finished floor level accordingly. At ground, first and second floor level, there are habitable room windows and areas of secluded private open space that have the potential to overlook the neighbouring habitable room windows and areas of private open space within 9 metres at the properties north, south and east of the site. Ground FloorAn existing 2.0 metre high paling fence is located along the northern and southern boundaries whilst a 2.6 metre high paling fence is located on the eastern boundary. Therefore, there are no overlooking issues from the proposed ground level. The existing fence which are proposed to be retained are shown on the elevations but are not shown on the site plans, this will be required as a condition of any permit issued.First floorMetal screens have been proposed to habitable room windows along the north and south and elevations of the building at first floor level to 1.7 metres from finished floor level. A section of the proposed metal screening has been provided which confirms that the screening is no more than 25% transparent to comply with standard B22.To the east at first floor level there is screening to part of the terrace at first floor level, however no other overlooking measures have been proposed. The applicant has submitted overlooking diagrams however there are still concerns that there may be overlooking opportunities from the habitable room window and terrace at both first and second floor level to the secluded private open space of No. 6 Flete Avenue. Therefore, permit conditions will require appropriate screening to the habitable rooms and terrace at first and second floor level on the east elevation in accordance with Standard B22. This will ensure the proposal will not result in any unreasonable overlooking into the SPOS area of No. 6 Flete Avenue.Second FloorMetal screens have been proposed along the north elevation at first floor level to 1.7 metres from finished floor level. A section of the proposed metal screening has been provided which confirms as that the screening is no more than 25% transparent to comply with standard B22.On the southern elevation at second floor level there is no screening proposed to any of the rooms. All of the rooms on this elevation are non-habitable room with the only habitable room window being that of the kitchen. There are concerns that there will be overlooking opportunities from the kitchen window to the SPOS and habitable room windows of No. 1/110 Kooyong Road. Therefore permit conditions will require appropriate screening to the kitchen window at second floor level on the southern elevation in accordance with Standard B22.Internal viewsGiven the orientation and layout of the apartments, there are no areas that will result in unreasonable internal views.Noise impacts The proposed apartment building is not expected to generate noise above and beyond that normally associated with a residential development. On Site Amenity and FacilitiesDwelling EntryA common entry to the development, with pedestrian gate and delineated pedestrian path, is clearly identifiable and is directly accessible from Kooyong Road. The building has been designed to provide an appropriate sense of address. Furthermore, each dwelling is clearly identifiable from the central lobby of each level within the building. Daylight to New WindowsAll proposed windows will face outdoor spaces clear to the sky with a 3 square metre light court with a minimum dimension of 1 metre and thus allow for an adequate amount of daylight into habitable rooms. Private Open SpaceApartments 1 and 2 will have secluded private open space (SPOS) areas in the form of a terrace accessed via a living room. The secluded private open space area of apartment 2 does not meet the numerical requirements of standard B28 requiring a minimum area of 25square metres and a minimum dimension of 3 metres. This apartment has secluded private open space in the form of two terraces. One of the secluded private open spaces areas is accessed via the living/dining room which is a minimum dimension of 2.5 metres and an area of 13.57 square metres. The secondary secluded private open space area to this apartment is accessed from the kitchen with a dimension of two metres and an area of 9.61 square metres. Although the SPOS area to this dwelling does not meet the requirements of standard B28 it is considered reasonable given the private open space area is useable. Also, as the two terraces to the apartment are surrounded by landscaping and a canopy trees, the terrace area will have a reasonable outlook.The secluded private open space area for apartment 1 is approximately 35.17 square metres and is located within the front setback of the site, this is considered acceptable as the proposed front fence measuring 1.8 metres in height will allow for some privacy to this area. In addition, this arrangement will allow the front garden character to be continued in the streetscape. The size of the balconies to apartments 3, 4, and 5 meets the numerical requirements of Standard B43, requiring a minimum area of 12 square metres and a minimum dimension of 2.4 metres. The proposed private open space areas to each apartment are considered sufficient to meet the recreation and service needs of future residents and all areas can be conveniently accessed from the main living areas with some apartments featuring multiple access points.Apartment Developments The amenity of the apartments is deemed to be of a high standard and complies with the Objectives of Clause 55.05.Energy efficiency in the design of the building has been considered in conjunction with Council’s Environmentally Sustainable Development Policy (Clause 22.05). All apartments benefit from dual aspect and will be able to achieve cross ventilation. Overall the apartments will offer high quality amenity with large internal areas (minimum of 197.5sq. m at first floor level), dual aspects, natural daylight and ventilation to each room and reasonably sized areas of private open space. No communal open space is required by Standard B36 as the development is for less than 40 dwellings. Deep soil planting requirements are listed at Standard B38. As this application retains an existing canopy tree over 8 metres in height, the minimum deep soil requirement is 5% of the site area. The area within the front setback and south eastern corner of the site has been relied on for deep planting and these areas equate to 6.18% of the site area. Standard B41 seeks to ensure the design of dwellings meets the needs of people with limited mobility. Notations on plans confirm that at least 50% (3 dwellings) will have at least one accessible bathroom. The dimensions and layout of these bathrooms has been documented on plans and meet the Standard. The building and apartment entries are located along the southern side of the building via a foyer with one lift core. A paved foot path extends along the south side of the apartment building, surrounded by raised planters. The development is considered to provide safe and efficient movements across the site for future occupants in accordance with Standard B42. As required by Standard B43 (Private open space above ground level), all balconies above ground floor level are in excess of 12 square metres in area and exceed the minimum dimension of 2.4 metres. The minimum area for a balcony within this development is 13.09sq. m, while the largest area of private open space is provided to Apartment 1 on the ground floor level at 35.17sq. m. The apartments will be provided with 13.2 cubic metres of storage for each dwelling within the external basement. Storage within the dwellings themselves will also be substantial given the floor area and size of rooms within each dwelling. The storage provided is in excess of the requirements of Standard B44 (Storage objective). A comprehensive Waste Management Plan has been provided in support of this application which provides an adequate response to Council’s waste guidelines and complies with the objectives of Standard B45 (Waste and recycling objectives). In terms of functional layout, room depth, windows and cross ventilation standards of Clause 55.07, the new dwellings are large in size with the smallest bedrooms having dimensions of 3.07m by 3.35m. The minimum living area dimensions exceed 3.6m and 12sqm in area as specified by Standard B46. Overall, this proposal is considered to offer high quality apartment accommodation for future occupants. Water Sensitive Urban Design The Water Sensitive Urban Design Response shows that the proposed 15,000L rainwater tank within the basement would result in a STORM rating of 104% which complies with the 100% minimum required under Clause 22.18Car Parking and TrafficCar Parking ProvisionEach new apartment within this development will be provided 2-3 car parking spaces within the basement level accessed via Kooyong Road. This exceeds the statutory rate by 1 space (a total of 11 spaces) and complies with the requirements of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. No visitor car parking is required for the reasons discussed earlier in this report. Car Park DesignAs detailed in the “Referrals” section of this report, there are outstanding items that need to be shown on the plans with regard to the design of the car parking layout and accessway. The items relate to the dimensioned width of the crossover and splays to be shown on the plans, dimensions and annotations that no buildings, fences or vegetation above 900mm in height can be placed within the sight triangle and dimensioned floor gradients within the basement levels to be a minimum gradients of 1 in 200 (0.5%) in accordance with the Planning Scheme and/or Australian Standards. These matters are not fundamental and can be addressed via conditions.Bicycle Parking The plans confirm that 3 bicycle spaces are to be provided within the basement and 2 are proposed within the footpath on the southern side of the development. The bicycle parking provision is deemed to be acceptable subject two bicycle racks within the footpath being removed from the plans. As outlined in the comments from Councils ESD advisor the bicycle racks within this area impede on the accessibility to the site and therefore a condition will be included on the permit requiring the removal of these bicycle spaces.Difference between the proposal and the Notice of Refusal issued for planning application 455/14 issued on 21 May 2015As outlined within the report, a Notice of Refusal for planning application 455/14 was issued on 21 May 2015 for ‘Construction of a multi- dwelling development in a General Residential Zone’ on the subject site. The application sought construction of a three storey apartment building comprising 8 dwellings (6x 2 bed plus study and 2x2 bedroom). The application was appealed to VCAT, however was withdrawn on 05 November 2015. The difference between this application and the application that was refused is that the setbacks to the side and rear boundaries have been increased and the design of the apartments is considered to be an appropriate neighbourhood character response. It is considered that this application addresses previous grounds of refusal which included daylight to existing windows, north facing windows and neighbourhood character.It is also noted that since the application was refused an application was approved at 110 Kooyong Road, directly to the south of the subject site. This application includes the construction of six townhouses with approximately 72% basement site coverage and built form constructed to the rear of the site. Construction of the townhouses has been completed. Essentially, this application is considered an appropriate response to the surrounding built form which has changed since the previous refusal on the subject site.ObjectionsIn response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following comments are made:?Loss of original building/demolitionThe subject site is not affected by a Heritage Overlay or a Neighbourhood Character Overlay and therefore a planning permit is not required to demolish the existing building.?NoiseThe development is not expected to generate noise above and beyond that of a normal residential building. Any noise associated with plant equipment or mechanical services (i.e. lift overrun) will be required to be baffled via a condition of any permit issued to comply with the relevant noise regulations of the Environment Protection Authority (EPA).Human Rights 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 three storey apartment building respects and responds to the neighbourhood character of the surrounding area and is in accordance with the objectives of State and local planning policies. ?Subject to conditions, the built form and landscaping is acceptable to the site and surrounding context.?The development will not unreasonably impact upon adjoining amenity as determined by compliance with the Clause 55 Objectives.?The development provides adequate parking provision at the site and can be safely accessed by vehicles.Attachments1.PA - 431/18 - 112 Kooyong Road Armadale - Attachment 1 of 1Plans RECOMMENDATIONThat a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 431/18 for the land located at 112 Kooyong Road, Armadale be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential Zone subject to the following conditions:1.Before the commencement of the development, one (1) electronic copy of plans drawn to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the revised plans Drawing No.s: TP.01, TP.02, TP.03, TP.04, TP.10, TP.11, TP.12, TP.13, TP.14, TP.20, TP.22, TP.30, TP.31, TP.32, TP.40, TP.41, TP.42, TP.43, TP.44, TP.45, TP.46, TP.50 and Council date stamped 05 February 2019 but modified to show:a)Minimum 20% permeability in accordance with Clause 55.03-4.b)Dimensioned width of the crossover and splays.c)Dimensions and annotations that no buildings, fences or vegetation above 900mm in height can be placed within the sight triangle.d)Dimensioned floor gradients within the basement levels to be a minimum gradients of 1 in 200 (0.5%) in accordance with the Planning Scheme and/or Australian Standards. e)Garage door width for each garage and confirmation that a minimum 4.8m is available for the double garages, and a minimum 7.2m is available for the triple garage.f)Height of the fence on the northern, eastern and southern boundaries to be shown on the ground floor plan and compliance with Standard B22 achieved.g)Bicycle racks within the footpath at ground floor level to be removed from the plans.h)Screening to the habitable rooms and terrace at first and second floor level on the east elevation in accordance with Standard B22 or the provision of overlooking diagrams that show no unreasonable overlooking into the private open space of No. 6 Flete Avenue.i)Screening to the kitchen window at second floor level on the southern elevation in accordance with Standard B22.j)Arboriculture assessment of existing vegetation along the northern boundary to determine the retention value and TPZ’s for each tree. The vegetation worthy of retention is to be shown on the landscape plan in accordance with condition no. 7.k)Any changes as required by the Sustainable Design Assessment, Waste Management Plan and Landscape Plan in accordance with Conditions 3, 6 and 7.All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.2.The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 3.Concurrent with the endorsement of any plans pursuant to Condition 1, a Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA) must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Upon approval the SDA will be endorsed as part of the planning permit and the development must incorporate the sustainable design initiatives outlined in the SDA to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The SDA must be in accordance with SDA prepared by GIW Environmental Solutions (Council date stamped 05 February 2019), but modified to show: a)Any changes required by Condition 1.b)User operable external shading devices to the east and west facing habitable room windows at first and second floor.c)Fixed external shading devices to the north facing habitable room windows at first and second floor.d)The number of toilets connected to the rainwater tank should be confirmed on plans.e)Visitor bicycle parking on the footpath at ground floor level removed from the plans and the SDA and BESS score credits updated accordingly.f)Solar panels and low VOC paints removed from the innovation section of the BESS report.All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.4.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.5.The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives detailed in the endorsed site plan and/or stormwater management report.6.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 be generally in accordance with the one prepared Ratio Consultants Pty Ltd Council date stamped 27 April 2018 but modified to include a reduction in the overall residential garbage storage capacity of no more than 120 litres per household per week in accordance with Council’s ‘City of Stonnington Residential Waste Management Guidelines’ to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.When 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. 7.Before the development starts, a landscape plan to be prepared by a landscape architect or suitably qualified or experienced landscape designer, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The landscape plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The landscape plan must be in accordance with the landscape plan prepared by Jack Merlo Landscape Architects Pty Ltd (Council date stamped 05 February 2019) but modified to show:a)Any changes as required by Condition 1 with no reduction of number of canopy trees.b)Existing vegetation on the northern boundary worthy of retention shown on the landscape plan. The vegetation shown to be retained must be in accordance with the arboriculture report required by condition no.1.c)A maintenance plan for the planter boxes on the first and second floor of the building.All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.8.Before the occupation of the building, the landscaping works as shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Landscaping at ground, first and second floor including the planter boxes must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.9.Concurrent with the endorsement of development plans a Tree Management Plan prepared by a suitably qualified arborist must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the Tree Management Plan will form part of this permit and all works must be done in accordance with the Tree Management Plan (AS 4970).The Tree Management Plan must detail measures to protect and ensure the viability of the Jacaranda tree located within the rear of the site. Among other things, the tree management plan must include the following information:a)Pre-construction (including demolition) – details to include a tree protection zone, height barrier around the tree protection zone, amount and type of mulch to be placed above the tree protection zone and method of cutting any roots or branches which extend beyond the tree protection zone.b)During-construction – details to include watering regime during construction and method of protection of exposed roots.c)Post-construction – details to include watering regime and time of final inspection when barrier can be removed and protection works and regime can cease.Pre-construction works and any root cutting must be inspected and approved by the Responsible Authority's Parks Unit. Removal of protection works and cessation of the Tree Management Plan must be authorised by the Responsible Authority's Parks Unit.10.Before the development (including excavation and demolition) starts, protection fencing must be afforded to the Platanus x acerifolia (London Plane) street tree at 112 Kooyong Road, and also for the street tree at 114 Kooyong Road, whose Structural Root Zone is located within the frontage of 112 Kooyong road, ?prior to construction works occurring. Fencing must comply with Section 4 of AS 4970 and form a 3m x 3m protection zone around the tree. 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.11.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 $13,178 as security against a failure to protect the health of Trees 1 – Platanus x acerifolia (London Plane) street tree 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(s) and, provided they have not been detrimentally affected, the bank guarantee will be discharged.12.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).13.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. 14.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.15.Prior to an ‘Occupancy Permit’ being issued, a suitably qualified Engineer must carry out a detailed inspection of the completed stormwater drainage system and associated works including all water storage tanks and detention (if applicable) to ensure that all works has been constructed in accordance with the approved design and the relevant planning permit conditions. Certification of the completed drainage from the Engineer must be provided to Council prior to a ‘Statement of Compliance’ being issued for the subdivision.16.The existing footpath levels must not be lowered or altered in any way at the property line (to facilitate the basement ramp). 17.The applicant must at their cost provide a stormwater detention system to restrict runoff from the development to no greater than the existing runoff based on a 1 in 10 A.R.I. to the satisfaction of Council’s Infrastructure Unit. Alternatively, in lieu of the stand-alone detention system, the owner may provide stormwater tanks that are in total 2,000 litres greater than those tanks required to satisfy WSUD requirements for the development. Those tanks must be connected to all toilets. 18.The redundant vehicular crossing must be removed at the same time as the buildings and works and the footpath and kerb reinstated at the owner’s cost to the satisfaction of Council.19.Any poles, service pits or other structures/features on the footpath required to be relocated to facilitate the development must be done so at the cost of the applicant and subject to the relevant authority’s consent.20.Prior to the occupation of the building, fixed privacy screens (not adhesive film or timber screens) designed to limit overlooking as required by Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 in accordance with the endorsed plans must be installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority thereafter for the life of the building.21.All plant and equipment (including air-conditioning units) shall be located or screened so as to minimise visibility from any of the surrounding footpaths and from overhead views and shall be baffled so as to minimise the emission of unreasonable noise to the environment in accordance with Section 48A of the Environment Protection Act 1970 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.22.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.23.This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: a)The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit. b)The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit. In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.NOTES:I.This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are obtained.II.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.III.Council has adopted a zero tolerance approach in respect to the failure to implement the vegetation related requirements of Planning Permits and endorsed documentation. Any failure to fully adhere to these requirements will be cause for prosecution. This is the first and only warning which will be issued. IV.The owners and occupiers of the dwelling/s hereby approved are not eligible to receive “Resident Parking Permits”.V.At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 stated that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing within the following timeframes:i.Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the 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. 3.Planning Application 0878/18 - 1/657 Chapel Street, South Yarra - Sale and supply of liquor (On Premises Licence) for a tavern in conjunction with the use of the premises as a beauty salon (as of right) in an Activity Centre Zone Manager Statutory Planning: Alexandra Kastaniotis General Manager Planning & Amenity: Stuart Draffin PURPOSEFor Council to consider a planning application for sale and supply of liquor (On Premises Licence) for a tavern in conjunction with the use of the premises as a beauty salon (as of right) in an Activity Centre Zone at 1/657 Chapel Street, South Yarra.Executive SummaryApplicant:On Tap Liquor Pty LtdWard:North Zone:Activity Centre Zone-Schedule 1Overlay:Environmental Audit Overlay Date lodged:27 August 2018Statutory days: (as at council meeting date)28Trigger for referral to Council:More than 7 objections Patron Numbers:60 patrons and 20 staffNumber of objections:30Consultative Meeting:Yes– held on 13 February 2019 Officer Recommendation:Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit BACKGROUNDThe ProposalThe plan that forms part of the basis of Council's consideration was prepared by Arklines and is known as Drawing No. A.001-Proposed Plan and Council date stamped 27 August 2018. A Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan prepared by On Tap Liquor Council date stamped 19 March 2019 has also been submitted as part of the application. Key features of the proposal are:?It is proposed to supply liquor on the premises as an ancillary service to a range of beauty services, including tanning, waxing, nails, skin treatment, makeup as well as massages. Only customers undergoing salon services may partake in a liquor based beverage. ?Use of the land for the sale and supply of liquor (On Premises Licence) for a tavern in conjunction with the use of the premises as a beauty salon (as of right use).?The hours of operation related to the sale of liquor are as follows:?Sunday to Wednesday between 9am and 9pm?Thursday, Friday and Saturday between 9am and 10pm ?Good Friday and Anzac Day between 12 noon and 9pm?The sale and supply of liquor will be via a glass at the bar with no taps to be installed at the premises. ?The consumption of liquor will be on the licensed premises only, with no takeaway liquor permitted.?The alcohol will be stored in a bar fridge under the ‘Nail Bar’ counter or in the kitchen area, with some bottles of liquor displayed on the shelves within the ‘Nail Bar’. ?The leasable floor space of the premises is approximately 218 square metres.?No live music is proposed within the venue. Recorded music will be played at the premises via a speaker system mounted in the roof which is pre-existing within the building. ?It is proposed that snacks, such as nuts, chocolate bars and packets of chips (and similar pre-packaged snack food) will be available for purchase on site. These snacks will be available throughout the entire operating hours.?A maximum patron capacity of 60 at any given time is proposed.?A maximum number of 20 staff at the premises at any given time is proposed. ?Entry/egress to and from the premises for patrons of the venue is accessible via Chapel Street on the south east side of the premises. ?With regard to waste management, the following is proposed: ?Glass rubbish will be removed from the premises during daylight hours only?Deliveries of any type will occur during daylight hours only?Additional waste bins will be provided in order to service the venue and private collection arranged.?Collections will only occur between 9am and 7pm on any given weekday.?Waste arrangements are part of a body corporate associated with the lease of the venue. All bins are stored in a secure waste room in the lower parking area which is part of the leasing arrangements of the facility. ?Bins are accessible via a roller door from Forrest Hill.?The applicant has also noted that five car spaces within the basement of the building are part of the leasehold for the existing business premises and will be available for use by staff. ?No buildings and works are proposed as part of this application. The application was formally amended on 19 March 2019 following public notification which resulted in changes to the opening hours as detailed above. These changes involved:?The hours of operation related to the sale of liquor have been amended from:?Monday to Saturday between 7am and 11pm?Sunday between 10am and 11pm to?Sunday to Wednesday between 9am and 9pm?Thursday, Friday and Saturday between 9am and 10pm ?Good Friday and Anzac Day between 12 noon and 9pm?The inclusion of a Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan.?Further Waste Management Details.Site and SurroundsThe subject site is located on the western side of Chapel Street on the north-west corner of its intersection with Forrest Hill. The site and adjoining properties have the following significant characteristics:?The subject site is located within the Chapel Street Activity Centre which accommodates residential, shopping, business, civic, cultural and entertainment use and development.?The subject site is identified as Unit 1 and is located at the ground floor in the far south-east corner within an eight storey building at 657 Chapel Street. The building is used as offices and a residential car park at ground floor, with sixty residential flats above as well as an additional level of basement car parking. The residential entry to the building is via Forrest Hill Road.?The building at 657 Chapel Street is irregular in shape and has frontages to Chapel Street of approximately 59.3m and to Forrest Hill of approximately 48.5m. A corner splay of approximately 2.7m exists with an entry to the subject site. The building has an estimated site area of 2,115 square metres.?The subject site (Unit 1) has a frontage to Chapel Street of 20.5m and to Forrest Hill of 12.5m and is accessed by the aforementioned 2. 7m corner splay.?The subject site is currently utilised as an unlicensed retail premises.?To the east of the subject site is Chapel Street, a wide two way road with on street parking available on either side. Further to the east, is 668-670 Chapel Street, a significant high rise mixed use complex commonly known as the “Vogue” building. The site contains four residential buildings comprising 275 dwellings, an art gallery, offices, day spa, food and drink premises, convenience store and associated car parking.?Further north-east of the subject site is 700 Chapel Street, a high rise mixed use building containing residential dwellings and a restaurant at ground floor. ?To the west of the subject site is Melbourne High School. The site shares a direct interface with the sporting ground oval area of the School. ?To the south is Forrest Hill, a narrow two way street which has parking available on the north side only. Further to the south is 651 Chapel Street, commonly known as ‘Quest Apartments’ containing forty-eight serviced apartments. ?To the north of the subject site is 661 Chapel Street, a mixed use development comprising of dwellings, shops, cafes and offices. Previous Planning Application(s)A search of Council records indicates the following relevant planning applications:?Planning Permit for 1119/15 issued on 22 September 2016 for 1/657 Chapel Street South Yarra (subject premises) for use of the land as a Restricted Retail Premises (Furniture & Homewares Shop) and the display of Business Identification Signage in a Mixed Use Zone.?Planning Permit 92/716 issued on 25 August 1993 for 657 Chapel Street South Yarra for development of an eight storey building for use as offices, sixty residential flats and associated car parking.The TitleThe site is described on Certificate of Title Volume 10192 Folio 972 as lot 9S on Plan of Subdivision 328655U and no covenants or easements affect the land.Planning ControlsThe following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:Clause 37.08 – Activity Centre Zone (Schedule 1) Pursuant to Clause 37.08-2 and Schedule 1 to the Zone, a permit is required for a tavern as it is a Section 2 use. Pursuant to Clause 37.08-2 and Schedule 1 to the Zone, a permit is not required to use the land for a shop (beauty salon) as it is a Section 1 use. Clause 45.03 - Environmental Audit Overlay Pursuant to Clause 45.03-1, before the commencement of a sensitive use, an environmental audit must be undertaken. As a tavern is not considered a “sensitive use”, the requirements under this provision are not triggered.Clause 52.27 – Licensed PremisesPursuant to Clause 52.27 a permit is required to use land to sell or consume liquor if a licence is required under the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998. Accordingly, a permit is required for the on-premises licence associated with the tavern.Clause 52.06 – Car Parking Clause 52.06 applies to a new use. A new use must not commence or the floor area of an existing use must not be increased until the required car spaces have been provided on the land. A permit is required to reduce (including reduce to zero) the requirement to provide the number of car parking spaces required under this clause. The subject site is situated in a Principal Public Transport Network Area and therefore, Clause 52.06 requires parking requirements to be calculated using column B of the table in Clause 52.06. In this instance, the car parking requirement for a Tavern and shop is calculated as 3.5 spaces per 100sqm of leasable floor area. The venue has approximately 218 square metres of leasable floor area, and therefore 7 car spaces will be required. Planning Permit 92/716 which allowed for the development of the eight storey mixed use building in which the subject premises is located, includes a basement level of car parking as well as additional car parking at ground level. Condition 4 of the Planning Permit states that “the area set aside for car parking shall include a minimum allocation of 73 spaces for the flats and 15 spaces for the offices. Outside of normal office hours, the spaces set aside for the offices shall be available to the residents and visitors of the flats”. The applicant has advised that five car spaces located within the basement of the building are allocated to the leasehold for the existing business premises and will be available for use by staff. The applicant has advised that as per the body corporate, the 5 allocated car spaces will be available for use by the leaseholder for exclusive use between: ?8am and 7pm Monday to Friday; and?9am to 12noon on SaturdaysWhile it is noted that these spaces are available for use by the subject premises, Condition 4 of the Planning Permit as noted above states “Outside of normal office hours, the spaces set aside for the offices shall be available to the residents and visitors of the flats”. As such, a conservative approach would require a full reduction of the 7 spaces is required, given these spaces will not be fully available for the entire duration of the proposed operating hours of the tavern. However, pursuant to Clause 52.06-3, a permit is not required to reduce the required number of car parking spaces for a new use of an existing building if the following requirements are met:?The building is in the Commercial 1 Zone, Commercial 2 Zone, Commercial 3 Zone or Activity Centre Zone. ?The gross floor area of the building is not increased. ?The reduction does not exceed 10 car parking spaces. ?The building is not in a Parking Overlay with a schedule that allows a financial contribution to be paid in lieu of the provision of the required car parking spaces for the use.On the basis that the subject site is within a Activity Centre Zone, is not within a parking overlay and the reduction in parking sought does not exceed 10 spaces, no planning permit is required for the proposal under this provision. Relevant Planning PoliciesClause 11.03-1S Activity Centres Clause 15Built Environment and HeritageClause 17Economic DevelopmentClause 17.02-1S BusinessClause 21.04Economic DevelopmentClause 21.06Built Environment and HeritageClause 21.09 Reference Documents Clause 22.10Licensed Premises PolicyClause 37.08Activity Centre ZoneClause 52.27Licensed PremisesClause 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 one sign on the Chapel Street frontage and one sign on the Forrest Hill frontage). The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily.The site is located in North Ward and objections from thirty (30) different properties have been received. The objections can be summarised as follows:?Noise impacts.?Antisocial behaviour.?Litter impacts and waste management.?Car parking and traffic impacts.?Security of building may be compromised by patrons entering the car park area in the basement. ?Potential for de-emphasising the beauty salon aspect.?Oversaturation of licensed premises.?Excessive patron numbers.?Excessive hours.?Unsuitable location of tavern close to residential properties.?Odours/fumes emanating from the premises.?Lack of ventilation in the building. A Consultative Meeting was held on 13 February 2019. The meeting was attended by Councillor Griffin, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council planning officer. The meeting resulted in the following changes to the application: ?The hours of operation related to the sale of liquor amended to:?Sunday to Wednesday between 9am and 9pm?Thursday, Friday and Saturday between 9am and 10pm ?Good Friday and Anzac Day between 12 noon and 9pm?The inclusion of a Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan.?Further Waste Management Details.?Commitment to include a condition of permit that ‘the use of the premises as a tavern with an on premises liquor licence is only to occur in conjunction with the use of the premises as a business orientated retail beauty salon unless with the written approval of the responsible authority’.Formal public notification of the amended proposal Council date stamped 19 March 2019 did not occur given the extent of changes as listed above result in an overall reduction in the opening hours and provide additional Waste Management details and a Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan. Therefore, the proposed changes would not result in any material detriment.ReferralsCommunity and Health Planner ?There is concerns around a beauty salon, in this location and of this size, being given approval to operate under an ‘On premise Liquor Licence’.?The venue proposes to supply liquor on the premises as an ancillary service with the operation of the beauty salon being the primary business. Whilst the difference between permitting a venue to the ‘Use of the land for the sale and supply of liquor (On Premises Licence) for a tavern in conjunction with the use of the premises as a beauty salon (as of right use)’ and permitting the ‘use of the land for the purposes of operating a beauty salon where the supply of liquor is an ancillary service’ might seem minimal, I think it is important that the licence type reflects which activity is ‘first and foremost’. ?It is recommended that the premises operate under a renewable limited licence where the scale and scope of the supply is substantially restricted or limited. ?The Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation (VCGLR) website does note that ?‘small businesses where the supply of liquor is ancillary to their business that do not fit within the exemption categories is one of the vendors that ‘would normally apply’ for a renewable limited licence.?In the on premise licence scenario, the supply of liquor is ‘first and foremost’ whereas it is clear that in a renewable limited licence scenario that the business, i.e. beauty salon is ‘first and foremost’.?Given the size of the venue (218 square metres), its location within an existing cluster on Chapel Street and a proposed maximum patron capacity of 60 - which is considerable for a beauty salon, I think it is preferable to err on the side of caution and proceed with the more restrictive licence type in this instance. Planner Response: Council’s Community and Health Planner had advised that the premises should operate under a ‘renewable limited licence’ rather than an ‘on premises licence’ as a renewable limited licence is more suited to the proposed use given the supply of liquor is ancillary to the business (i.e. beauty salon), and the scale and scope of the supply under this type of licence is substantially restricted or limited in nature.Various ways in which the supply may be limited under a renewable limited licence include the type and number of products supplied, customers, trading hours, size of the premises and means of delivery/supply to customers. The applicant has elected to apply for an ‘on-premises licence’ rather than an renewable limited licence as to allow for a greater scope for trading hours and flexibility in terms of the type and quantity of alcohol to be supplied. It is important to note that pursuant to Clause 52.27 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, a planning permit is not required to use land to sell or consume liquor under a ‘limited licence’. As such, if the use were to operate under this type of licence, an application for a planning permit would not be required and would not be subject to any notice requirements of section 52(1) (a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of section 82(1) of the Act.While an ‘on-premises licence’ does not have the same restrictions in relation to the scale and scope of the supply of liquor, it is considered to be of more benefit to allow the premises to operate under this type of licence for the following reasons:?A Planning permit is required for an ‘on premises licence’, which allows for Council to impose permit conditions which are enforceable and can appropriately regulate the proposed use to ensure there is no detrimental impact on the amenity of the surrounding area. These conditions include controlling the hours in which the premises can operate, the number of patrons housed on the premises, noise levels emanating from the premises, controlling artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes etc as well as the requirement for a Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan and Waste Management Plan. ?The applicant has elected a condition in that the use of the premises as a tavern with an on premises liquor licence is only to occur in conjunction with the use of the premises as a beauty salon. This will ensure that the premises will not be used as a stand alone tavern. ?The applicant has committed to a condition that five (5) car spaces in the basement are to be provided for staff (noting that a permit is not required for the provision of car parking to the premises). ?The applicant has committed to conditions that the sale and supply of liquor must only be to patrons partaking in beauty services and that the sale and supply of liquor must be via glass service with no taps to be installed at the premises. As such, it is considered an ‘on-premises’ licence is appropriate in that Council is able to regulate the use of the site by the means described above, as opposed to a renewable limited licence in which the premises could operate as of right without the requirement for a planning permit. If a renewable limited licence was issued Council could not ask for a Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan, Waste Management Plan, car parking spaces or any other conditions. It is considered the above conditions are sufficient in controlling the scale and scope of the supply of liquor for an ‘on-premises licence’. KEY ISSUESStrategic Justification The site sits within the Chapel Street Activity Centre. Council’s Local Policy on Activity Centres at Clause 21.04-1 classifies Chapel Street as a ‘Group 1 – Principle Activity Centre. This is reinforced by the zoning of the land within the Activity Centre Zone. The site is located within the Forrest Hill precinct, sub precinct FH-3 within the Chapel ReVision Structure Plan. The Structure Plan envisages a vibrant, higher density true mixed use precinct that makes a significant contribution towards providing housing and employment opportunities in the Chapel Street Activity Centre and the broader City of Stonnington. Council’s strategic vision for the municipality includes economic development and entertainment and hospitality uses which are recognised for their contribution to the vitality and viability of the City without dominating or adversely affecting activity centres and the surrounding residential areas.Clause 17.02-1S (Business) seeks to encourage development which meet the communities’ needs for retail, entertainment, office and other commercial services and provides net community benefit in relation to accessibility, efficient infrastructure use and the aggregation and sustainability of commercial facilities. Clause 21.04-2 (Entertainment Uses) seeks to support entertainment uses in activity centres that reflect the role and function of individual centres whilst minimising adverse amenity impacts. Clause 21.04-2 aims to ensure that entertainment uses are directed to activity centres and away from locations close to residential zones where licensed trade occurs after 11pm. Clause 22.10 (Licensed Premises Policy) provides guidance for licensed premises, generally directing that such uses be located within activity centres. The policy also specifies that licensed premises operating after 11pm should be located within a Principal Activity Centre and away from residential land.Clause 52.27 (Licensed Premises) guides Council to consider the cumulative impact of any existing licensed premises and the proposed licensed premises on the amenity of the surrounding area, taking into account the hours of operation and number of patrons. Having regard to relevant policy and objections, the key issues in consideration of this application are:?The use of the land as a tavern in conjunction with the use of the premises as a beauty salon (as of right use) in an Activity Centre Zone.?Amenity issues associated with the on premises liquor license including noise, hours, and patrons.Use of a Tavern in conjunction with a beauty salon:The subject site is located within a Principle Activity Centre where the purpose of the zone is to (amongst other things): To encourage a mixture of uses and the intensive development of the activity centre: ?As a focus for business, shopping, working, housing, leisure, transport and community facilities. ?To support sustainable urban outcomes that maximise the use of infrastructure and public transport.The relevant decision guidelines of Schedule 1 to the Activity Centre Zone require that consideration be given to the extent to which the proposed use, contributes to a vibrant local economy and promote the Activity Centre as a tourist destination.The application proposes to use the land for the sale and supply of liquor (On Premises Licence) for a tavern in conjunction with the use of the premises as a beauty salon. It is noted that the use of the site as a beauty salon is an as of right use in the Activity Centre Zone that does not require planning permission. Therefore it is only the Tavern use and liquor licence that are the subject of this assessment. The hours of operation related to the sale of liquor are Sunday to Wednesday between 9am and 9pm, Thursday, Friday and Saturday between 9am and 10pm and Good Friday and Anzac Day between 12 noon and 9pm. The Tavern is proposed with a maximum capacity of 60 patrons and 20 staff members. This is a relatively small number of patrons when compared to other venues. The surrounding land comprises of a number of uses, some with liquor licenses with varying hours. The operation of an on premises liquor licence with a capacity of 60 patrons, is considered “low risk” by the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation. The application was also submitted with a Patron Capacity Report from a Building Surveyor advising that according to Building Code regulations, the tavern can accommodate a maximum of 75 patrons. As noted above, the applicant has elected for a permit condition which only allows the tavern use and on premises liquor licence to occur in conjunction with the use of the site as a beauty salon. As such, if the use of the salon ceased to trade, the liquor licence and tavern use associated with the venue would be surrendered and the venue could not operate as a licensed tavern in its own right without the proposed beauty salon service. This was in response to objector concerns with regard to the potential for ‘de-emphasising’ the beauty salon aspect of the proposal in which the premises could potentially revert to a standalone tavern. The premises will not be operating as a standalone tavern, but primarily as a beauty salon where the supply of liquor will be a secondary service that will allow patrons to consume an alcoholic beverage whilst partaking in the beauty services offered by the business. In addition to the above condition, permit conditions will also require that only patrons partaking in beauty services may be served an alcohol beverage. Being in an Activity Centre Zone, a Tavern that operates until no later than 10pm is a use that is consistent with the role of the function of the area as an entertainment precinct. The site is of smaller scale, offering a select service catering to personal service with a liquor component. The site also proposes activities that has the capacity to increase customer interaction and activation along Chapel Street. It is expected that in an entertainment precinct, a number of licenced premises will exist within close proximity to each other. The information from the applicant shows there are 77 licenced premises within a 500 metre radius of the site. Many of these are restaurant and café licences and packaged liquor licences, while 3 venues operate under a general late night (on-premises) licence.Despite the high number of venues, Council’s Local Licensed Premises Policy recognises that small, well managed licensed premises generally present a low risk of adverse impacts to surrounding land. As it is considered that the proposal falls within this category, it is not likely that it will increase any cumulative impact associated with licenced venues to an unacceptable level.Further consideration of the impacts associated with the proposed liquor licence are provided in the following sections of this report.Liquor Licence With regard to liquor, it is not expected that the introduction of a liquor licence will adversely impact on the surrounding area by way of the activities on site or the noise omitted from this premises.The introduction of the liquor licence associated with the tavern and beauty salon use will continue to encourage a diversity of services within the activity centre; an area specifically designated for such uses.It is noted an exemption from the requirements of obtaining a liquor licence associated with a hairdressing business is in place under the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998. A condition of this exemption is that ‘liquor is supplied without charge and the supply is ancillary to the provision of hairdressing or barber services’. Given the application seeks the ability to supply liquor in which customers will be charged for alcohol, the proposal does not meet the above exemption and an on-premises liquor licence is therefore sought. Hours and NoiseBoth Clause 22.10 and Clause 52.27 address the potential for an adverse cumulative effect on an area from a licences premises. Specifically, the policy at Clause 22.10 states: Trading after 11:00pm is discouraged for licensed premises adjacent to a residential zone/use unless the responsible authority is satisfied that the use will not adversely affect the amenity of the area. The proposal complies with the policy expectations of Clause 22.10 as the use is not proposed to operate past 11pm on any night. The proposed hours of operation of the liquor licence cease at 10pm on a Thursday, Friday and Saturday, and 9pm on all remaining days of the week. These hours are deemed appropriate given the sites location in an Activity Centre Zone and this closing time will reduce the potential noise and impacts of patrons on the surrounding area and will minimise the likelihood of the tavern becoming a source of potential harm. Clause 52.27 requires a planning permit to use land for the sale and consumption of liquor. The decision guidelines of the Clause ask council to consider the following: ?The impact of the sale or consumption of liquor permitted by the liquor licence on the amenity of the surrounding area. ?The impact of the hours of operation on the amenity of the surrounding area. ?The impact of the number of patrons on the amenity of the surrounding area. ?The cumulative impact of any existing licensed premises and the proposed licensed premises on the amenity of the surrounding area. With regard to the physical context of the subject site, it is acknowledged the site is surrounded by mixed use buildings, of which comprise of a number of residential dwellings. The subject building itself comprises of a number of residential apartments located directly above the proposed tavern. Objections have raised concerns with the noise from the premises given the proximity of the dwellings above and surrounding the site. Whilst the amenity of the surrounding area must be considered, it must also be acknowledged that residents who live in or adjacent to a commercial area, and so enjoy very convenient proximity to the services and infrastructure of an inner city activity centre, should not also expect to enjoy residential amenity consistent with a residential suburb that is more removed from the commercial centre. That being said, a reasonable balance must be struck between the commercial objectives of the activity zone and the protection of the amenity of higher density development.Given the enclosed nature of the venue, the number of patrons is unlikely to generate a level of noise that would be a disturbance to nearby residential properties. It is acknowledged that some noise emissions are likely to result from the proposed use, however the application has been submitted with a comprehensive Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan that details how noise will be managed on the site. The Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan includes the following measures and comments with regard to noise:?Background recorded music will be played at the venue on a daily basis utilising the installed speaker system in the roof of the venue. No live music will be provided as part of the operation. It is recommended that this also be required by permit condition. ?Bottles / Cans can only be emptied into the waste bins during daylight hours only on any given day of trade in order to reduce possible noise. There will be no transfer of bottles to bins in large quantities.?A sign will be erected at the entry exit point to read; “We ask that all patrons are respectful of residents in the area and depart quietly”.?The venue operation is internal use only. ?The front of the property is located on Chapel Street which is located in a commercial precinct (Activity Centre) recognised as a highly active commercial entertainment area. Permit conditions will require that at all times, the use of the Tavern must be carried out in accordance with the endorsed Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.Permit conditions will also require that music noise emanating from the site must comply with State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Music Noise from Public Premises) No. N-2. Amenity and safetyThe ACZ1 objectives with regard to amenity include the following:?To enhance the liveability of the area and ensure that the Activity Centre provides a high quality environment. ?To manage potential and existing conflicts between residential amenity and hospitality and entertainment uses. ?To ensure the appropriate location and scale of residential, hospitality and entertainment uses so as to contribute to the liveability and role of the Activity Centre. ?To protect and enhance amenity within the Activity Centre and surrounding established residential neighbourhoods. Clause 22.10 details that research has found that smaller well managed premises generally present a low risk of adverse impacts, in comparison to large licensed premises that operate late at night.As noted above, the applicant has submitted a Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan which has been designed to ensure that the operations of the venue provide a safe environment for patrons and the broader community. The Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan also includes responsible service of alcohol, safety lighting, staff training, neighbourhood amenity management and waste management. As discussed, should a permit issue for this site, the use of the tavern will be required to be managed in accordance with the endorsed Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan. The measures that have been proposed are considered acceptable to ensure that the tavern use does not unreasonably impact on the surrounding amenity. It is further noted that due to the nature of the use of the site as a beauty salon in conjunction with the tavern use, this will reduce the potential for a vertical drinking culture. Vertical drinking refers to the action of standing up and drinking in a crowded venue which is associated with binge drinking and alcohol consumption without the accompaniment of food. The Red Line Plan shows a ‘concept’ layout of the internal furnishings, which includes a number of seats and benches in the waiting lounge, nail bar and pedicure room, as well as a number of ‘beauty beds’. There will not be large expanses available for standing only. Given the nature of the services associated with the liquor licence (i.e. nails, makeup, massage services etc.), a high number of the patrons would be able to sit down at any time, which will reduce potential for a vertical drinking culture. It is also noted that the applicant has advised that the sale and supply of liquor will be via a glass at the bar with no taps to be installed at the premises (as some objectors raised concerns with the use of ‘kegs’). A permit condition will confirm this requirement. Entry/egress to and from the premises for patrons of the venue is easily accessible via Chapel Street to the south east of the premises. The site has excellent access to public transport as well as taxi services which will reduce the likelihood of people congregating in front of the venue when leaving. ?It is noted that there is some separation provided from the subject from other licensed venues in the area. This would discourage people from congregating at this intersection with Chapel Street and Forrest Hill and there would be less risk of patrons of this venue having to mix with patrons from another nearby venue. This lessens the likelihood that patrons would move between venues, enabling patron behaviour and liquor consumption to be managed more effectively by the venue.?Permit conditions will require that patrons must not at any time congregate on the ramp and lounge entry to the tavern. Overall, it is considered the proposed hours, patron numbers and noise can all be adequately regulated and managed through permit conditions.WasteObjectors also have concerns regarding the waste management and associated collection. The applicant has confirmed there are a number of waste and recycle bins that are in use by residents of the building and stored in the basement area (bin rooms). At present there is a 1000 litre waste bin and 1000 litre recycle bin that is in use. The Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan submitted states the following with regard to waste: ?Glass rubbish will be removed from the premises during daylight hours only.?Deliveries of any type will occur during daylight hours only.?Additional waste bins will be provided in order to service the venue and private collection arranged.?Collections will only occur between 9am and 7pm on any given weekday.?Waste arrangements are part of a body corporate associated with the lease of the venue. All bins are stored in a secure waste room in the lower parking area which is part of the leasing arrangements of the facility. ?Bins are accessible via a roller door in Forrest Hill.Council’s Local Law states that private waste collections must only occur between the hours of 7:00am and 10:00pm Monday-Saturday and between the hours of 9:00am and 10:00pm on Sunday and Public Holidays. The hours proposed for waste collection are consistent with Council’s Local Law. Like any other use in the activity centre, the waste collection and deliveries to the site must at all times be carried out in accordance with Council’s local laws. A condition requiring a Waste Management Plan will be placed to ensure collection of waste will be conducted in an acceptable manner. Additionally, it is also recommended to include a condition that requires the disposal of empty bottles in bins during daytime hours only, to further minimise any impacts.Car parkingWith regard to car parking, it is not expected that the approval of a liquor licence to this site will have any appreciable impact on the existing car parking demands in the area. The site is well located to public transport, paid parking facilities and is likely to cater to high levels of foot traffic.Multiple public and private car parks exist in the activity centre catering for any long term parking demand. The applicant has also advised that five car spaces within the basement of the building are part of the leasehold for the existing business premises and will be available for use for staff. As noted above, a planning permit is not required for the proposed car parking reduction given the site is located within a Principle Public Transport Network, and therefore the matter of car parking is not a relevant consideration of this application. ObjectionsIn response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following comments are made:?Odours/fumes emanating from the premises and ventilation in the buildingIt is not anticipated that the proposal would have an unreasonable impact in terms of odours. A condition will be included on any permit issued requiring that the use and development must be managed so that the amenity of the area is not detrimentally affected through odours. The applicant has noted that only small quantities of beauty products will be stored and vents are provided within the building. Concerns raised with regard to flammable materials/ventilation of the building are not relevant planning considerations. ?Security of building may be compromised by patrons entering the car park area in the basement. The residential entry to the existing building is separated from the entry to the proposed premises. The residential entry is from Forrest Hill Road where as the entry to the premises will be via the splay area interfaced with Chapel Street. Residents have raised safety concerns with patrons potentially using the car parks in the basement in which they would have access to the residential foyer. The applicant has stated the car spaces are intended for staff. Due to the limited amount of spaces available to the premises and given the entry to the premises itself will be separate from the residential entry, it is not considered the proposal will result in unreasonable amenity impacts to existing residents by way of safety and security.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.The objectors are concerned that the proposed liquor licence is not appropriate and will result in unacceptable amenity impacts. However, for the reasons discussed above, it is considered that the proposal will not give rise to unreasonable amenity impacts. Furthermore, the subject site is zoned Activity Zone 1 and forms part of the Chapel Street Activity Centre. Council’s planning policies strongly support vibrant retailing, commercial, entertainment and community uses within the Chapel Street Activity Centre. The proposal is consistent with the policy direction as it will contribute to the entertainment role that the Activity Centre has to play. The proposal is also consistent with the requirements of Clause 22.10 (Licensed Premises Policy) and Clause 52.27 (Licensed premises). Attachments1.PA - 878-18 - 1-657 Chapel Street South Yarra - Attachment 1 of 1Plans RECOMMENDATIONThat a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 878/18 for the land located at 1/657 Chapel Street, South Yarra be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for Sale and supply of liquor (On Premises Licence) for a tavern in conjunction with the use of the premises as a beauty salon (as of right) in an Activity Centre Zone subject to the following conditions:1.Before the commencement of the use, 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 amended plans but modified to show:a)Waste Management Plan as per Condition 13. b)Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan updated to refer to the operating hours as per Condition 4. 2.The plans endorsed to accompany the permit must not be amended without the written consent of the Responsible Authority. 3.A maximum number of 60 patrons and 20 staff may be housed on the premises at any one time to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 4.The tavern use and associated sale and consumption of liquor hereby permitted may operate only between the hours of:Sunday to Wednesday between 9:00am and 9:00pmThursday, Friday and Saturday between 9:00am and 10:00pm Good Friday and Anzac Day between 12 noon and 9:00pm5.The use of the premises as a tavern with an on premises liquor licence is only to occur in conjunction with the use of the premises as a beauty salon unless with the written consent of the Responsible Authority. 6.The sale and supply of liquor must only be to patrons partaking in beauty services. 7.The sale and supply of liquor must be via glass service with no taps to be installed at the premises. 8.Five (5) car spaces in the basement are to be provided for staff and made available for exclusive use by the premises between: 8am and 7pm Monday to Friday; and9am to 12noon on Saturdays9.No live or amplified music may be provided within the tavern hereby approved to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.10.The provision of music on the premises must be limited to background music unless with the written consent of the Responsible Authority. 11.Prior to the commencement of use, the applicant must display a sign at the exit of the premises advising patrons to respect the amenity of adjacent residential areas and to leave in a quiet and orderly manner, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 12.Patrons must not at any time congregate on the ramp and lounge entry to the tavern. 13.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 areas.b)The location of bin storage on site.c)The number of bins to be provided.d)Method of waste and recyclables collection.e)Hours of waste and recyclables collection .f)Method of presentation of bins for waste collection.When 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.14.The collection of wastes and recyclables from the premises (other than normal Stonnington City Council collection) must be in accordance with Council's General Local Laws. 15.All loading and unloading of goods must be undertaken in accordance with Council’s Local Laws. 16.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. 17.Bottles and rubbish must only be removed from within the premises between the hours of 9am and 7pm on any given day. 18.All mechanical equipment installed including, but not limited to air-conditioning, kitchen exhausts and refrigeration units shall be designed, installed and commissioned to comply with SEPP N-1. 19.Noise emanating from the subject land must not exceed the permissible noise levels when determined in accordance with State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise from Commerce, Industry and Trade) No. N-1, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Any works required to ensure and maintain the noise levels from the tavern are in compliance with this policy must be completed prior to the commencement of the use or occupation of the site and maintained thereafter, all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 20.Noise emanating from the subject land must comply with State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Music Noise from Public Premises) No. N-2, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Any works required to ensure and maintain the noise levels of the tavern are in compliance with this policy must be completed prior to the commencement of the use or occupation of the site and maintained thereafter, all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 21.The use and development must be managed so that the amenity of the area is not detrimentally affected through the:a)Transport of materials, goods or commodities to or from the land.b)Appearance of any building, works or materials.c)Emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste water, waste products, grit or oil.22.The approved Venue, Noise and Amenity Action Plan forms part of the permit and the use must operate in accordance with it to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 23.This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:a)The use is not started within two years from the date of this permit.b)The use is discontinued for a period of two years or more.In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing within the prescribed timeframes, where the use allowed by the permit has not yet started.NotesA.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.Background music level, in relation to premises, means a level that enables patrons to conduct a conversation at a distance of 600 millimetres without having to raise their voices to a substantial level. C.This permit does not give any authority to occupy the footpath for trading without prior approval from Council's Local Laws department. A permit must be obtained for footpath trading and it must accord with the relevant Footpath Trading Code. D.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: a)Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed by the permit has not yet started; and b)Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires. 4.Planning Application 1054/18 - 11-13 Wilson Street, South Yarra VIC 3141 – construction of a 10 storey commercial building plus basement car parking for 20 vehiclesManager Statutory Planning: Alexandra Kastaniotis General Manager Planning & Amenity: Stuart Draffin PURPOSEFor Council to consider a planning application for construction of a multi-level mixed use building in the Activity Centre Zone and a reduction to the car parking requirements under Clause 52.06 at 11-13 Wilson Street, South Yarra.Executive SummaryApplicant:ProUrbanWard:North Zone:Activity Centre Zone, Schedule 1 (ACZ1)Overlay:Special Building OverlayEnvironmental Audit OverlayIncorporated Plan Overlay, Schedule 3Date lodged:15 October 2018Statutory days: (as at council meeting date)161Trigger for referral to Council:Building greater than 4 storeys and seven or more objectionsNumber of objections:18Consultative Meeting:Yes – held on 21 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 Travis Walton and are known as Drawing No’s: TP01, TP02, TP03, TP04, TP05, TP06, TP07, TP08, TP09, TP10, TP11, SD01, SD02 and Council date stamped 5 November 2018.Key features of the proposal are:?Construction of a 10 storey mixed use building comprising retail tenancies at the ground floor and offices above. ?The ground floor level proposes two retail tenancies (Retail A and B) with a pedestrian link through the centre of the site connecting Wilson Street with Garden Lane. The vehicle access ramp is located to the north-west within Garden Lane and a substation is located to the north-east, abutting the northern title boundary. ?Levels 1 and 2 contain 944 square metres of office floor area. No setbacks are proposed to the front, side or rear boundaries at these podium levels. ?Level 3 comprises 705 square metres of office floor space with a terrace along the north and south boundaries with the building setback 3 metres to both the front and rear boundaries. ?Levels 4 to 7 comprise 705 square metres of office floor space with no terraces. A 3 storey feature lightweight green fa?ade screen is proposed on the northern boundary from Level 3 to 5. ?Level 8 contains 441 square metres of office floor area with a terrace that wraps around the east, south and west side of the building providing 4.5 metres setbacks to the east and west boundaries and an overall setback of 5.5 metres to the southern boundary to the office fa?ade. ?Level 9 also contains 441 square metres of office floor area but does not contain any terraces. ?The lift lobby and services are positioned centrally on the north boundary and extend for the full height of the building. ?The maximum height of the building is proposed to reach 40.5 metres above ground. ?A three storey podium with a street wall height of between 12.6 and 12.7 metres presents to Garden Lane and Wilson Street. Above the street walls the building is setback 3 metres to both frontages, although a lightweight green fa?ade screen extends up to a height of 23.2 metres (Level 5) on the northern boundary. At the uppermost levels (Levels 8 and 9), the tower form is setback from Wilson Street 5.5 metres; 3 metres from Garden Lane; and 4.5 metres from both side boundaries.?The building features a mix of materials including pre cast concrete panels and varying types of glazing, such as back painted grey glass. ?A basement car park is proposed to be accessed from Garden Lane and contains 20 car parking spaces and 44 bicycle spaces, along with end of trip facilities and 44 lockers. Site and SurroundsThe site is located on the southern side of Garden Lane and the northern side of Wilson Street, in South Yarra, approximately 40 metres to the east of Bray Street. The site has the following significant characteristics:?The site comprises one parcel of land and is a regular shape with a total area of 1125 square metres.?The site has a frontage to Wilson Street of 41 metres and a site depth of 27.4 metres and the land is generally flat. ?The site is currently developed with a commercial multi-level car park over three floor levels covering the entire site. The existing car park has a capacity of 94 spaces. ?Access to the car park is currently via both Wilson Street and Garden Lane via three vehicle access points.?Wilson Street is a one-way street (west bound), with car parking on both sides of the street; while Garden Lane caters for two-way traffic, despite being narrower. The subject site is within the Chapel Street Activity Centre and is easily accessible by public transport with tram services on Chapel Street, Toorak and Commercial Roads as well as Hawksburn Railway Station located approximately 500 metres to the east and South Yarra Railway Station approximately 650 metres to the north-west. The immediate area is undergoing substantial change and features a mixture of single and double storey commercial buildings and higher density residential/mixed use buildings along Wilson, Garden and Bray Streets. Planning Permit No. 1027/17 has recently issued for the redevelopment of the Jam Factory to allow for a number of commercial buildings with heights ranging from 3 storeys (19m) to 15 storeys (72m).The site interfaces with adjoining land as follows:To the north across Garden Lane is a residential building (No. 20 -24 Garden Street) that relies on Garden Lane for vehicle access to the ground level car parking (in car stackers). Garden Lane has a width of 3.7 metres and caters for two-way traffic. The adjacent residential building was approved by Planning Permit 633/09 and allowed for the development of apartments over eight levels (with a height of 26 metres above ground) and many balconies and windows oriented towards the south. At the first, second and third floor levels balconies abut the southern title boundary for the full width of the building. Above the third floor, balconies are setback 3 metres from Garden Lane. A three storey residence is also located opposite the subject site to the north-east, known as No. 25 Garden Lane. This dwelling is constructed to the southern boundary with a garage entrance via Garden Lane and private open space is located within the centre of the dwelling.An 11 storey residential building has been approved at the direction of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) by Planning Permit 974/13 at 8-12 & 12A Garden Street & 60 Bray Street, South Yarra (directly to the north-west of the subject site). This apartment building has an overall height of 34 metres and was the subject of extensive work undertaken with Council Officer’s, including Council’s Urban Designer which resulted in a setback of the building from the Bray Street property boundary by 3.6m for all levels. In compensation for voluntarily setting the building back from the property line, additional height was allowed to the building over and above that adopted in the Design and Development Overlay, Schedule 7 (23m) which affected the site at the time the permit issued in March 2015.Directly to the east of the subject site at 15 Wilson Street is a two storey office building that occupies the entire site. Further to the east at No. 21 Wilson Street is a four storey residential building comprising apartments. Wilson Street is located to the south of the subject site and has a width of 7.2 metres, with parking on both sides of the street. Directly opposite the subject site are single and double storey commercial buildings with the exception of No. 24 Wilson Street, which features a five storey apartment building with a building height of 14.9 metres (approved by Planning Permit 1068/03). There are a number of apartments on each floor level that are oriented to the north, towards the subject site. Vehicles access to this building is via Ellis Street to the rear. Notably, Planning Permit 651/14 issued on 15 July 2016 for the land at 14-16 Wilson Street (opposite the subject site), allows for the construction of a 10 storey building comprising a shop and apartments with an overall height of 29.3 metres above Wilson Street. This permit has not been acted on to date and works have not yet commenced on site. To the west of the subject site is an 8 storey apartment building at No. 5-7 Wilson Street which was approved by Planning Permit 743/10 on 12 July 2011. The residential building has an overall height of 25.8 metres above natural ground and exhibits a solid wall on the east boundary, being the shared boundary with the subject site. Previous Planning Application(s)A search of Council records indicates the following relevant planning applications for this site:?Planning Permit 50/79 issued on 21 November 2001 for the use and development of the land for a car park. The TitleThe site is described on Certificate of Title Volume 10661 Folio 315 as Lot 1 on Plan of Subdivision 433793U and no covenants affect the land.Planning ControlsThe following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:ZoneClause 37.08 – Activity Centre Zone, Schedule 1Pursuant to Clause 37.08-2 and Schedule 1, a permit is not required to use the land for retail and office. Pursuant to Clause 37.08-5, a permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry out works unless the schedule to this zone specifies otherwise. Schedule 1 does not include any exemptions. Pursuant to Clause 37.08-6, a permit may be granted to construct a building or construct or carry out works which is not in accordance with any design and development requirement in the schedule to this zone unless the schedule to this zone specifies otherwise.Schedule 1The subject site is within the South Yarra Precinct, sub-precinct JF-3 and is designated as a Side Street Use in Schedule 1 to the ACZ. There is a north-south Indicative Pedestrian Link identified through the site. The Schedule identifies the following preferred built form guidelines applicable to development on the subject site:?Preferred maximum building height 27 metres (8 storeys)?Maximum street wall height to Wilson Street and Garden Lane of 12 metres with a 3 metre setback above the street wall up to 21 metres and a 6 metre setback above 21 metres (Type 2 interface). Overlay(s)Clause 43.03 – Incorporated Plan Overlay, Schedule 3The application does not include an application for a liquor licence or a tavern and therefore no permit is required under this Overlay. Clause 44.05 – Special Building OverlayPursuant to Clause 44.05-2 a permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry out works. Clause 45.03 – Environmental Audit OverlayPursuant to Clause 45.03-1, before a sensitive use (residential use, child care centre, pre-school centre or primary school) commences or before the construction or carrying out of buildings and works in association with a sensitive use commences, either: ?A certificate of environmental audit must be issued for the land in accordance with Part IXD of the Environment Protection Act 1970, or ?An environmental auditor appointed under the Environment Protection Act 1970 must make a statement in accordance with Part IXD of that Act that the environmental conditions of the land are suitable for the sensitive use. The above does not apply as this application does not propose a sensitive use. Particular ProvisionsClause 52.06 – Car ParkingPursuant to Clause 52.06-2, the car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided on the land prior to the commencement of a new use.Pursuant to Clause 52.06-5, the uses require the following rate of car parking:UsageNumber/AreaRateRequired SpacesOffice6295m23 spaces per 100m2 of net floor area188Shop705m23.5 spaces per 100m2 of leasable floor area24Total spaces required212The proposed development provides a total of 20 car spaces within a basement car park, which is a shortfall of 192 spaces from the requirements of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. A reduction in the number of car parking spaces is sought. Clause 52.34 – Bicycle FacilitiesThe development generates a requirement for 27 bicycle parking spaces with 50 spaces proposed throughout the building. 44 spaces are proposed within the basement and 6 visitor spaces located at the ground floor level. This is a surplus of 23 spaces from the statutory requirements. A total of 6 shower facilities are also required. The proposal includes 4 shower facilities and 44 lockers. Relevant Planning PoliciesClause 11.01SettlementClause 11.03Activity CentresClause 15Build Environment and HeritageClause 17 Economic DevelopmentClause 18TransportClause 19InfrastructureClause 21.03VisionClause 21.04Economic DevelopmentClause 21.06Built Environment and HeritageClause 21.07Open Space and EnvironmentClause 21.08 InfrastructureClause 22.05Environmentally Sustainable DevelopmentClause 22.18Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design) PolicyPlanning Scheme Amendments Amendment C276Amendment C276 is currently being progressed to undertake refinements to the Activity Centre Zone – Schedule 1. As part of this amendment, the Indicative Pedestrian Link between Garden Lane and Garden Street (to the north of this site) is proposed to be removed. Council adopted the recommendations of the Panel Report with changes on 17th December 2018. The adopted amendment has been submitted to the Minister of Planning for approval. AdvertisingThe 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 objections from 18 different properties have been received. The concerns can be summarized as: ?Building height?Visual bulk?Separation distance between towers?Loss of light?Overshadowing?Overlooking and loss of privacy?Viability of the green wall/landscaping?Parking and traffic?Light spill?General loss of amenity?Loss of viewsA Consultative Meeting was held on 21 February 2019. The meeting was attended by Councillors Chandler, Koce and Griffin, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council planning officer. The meeting did not result in any changes to the plans; however the applicant has indicated a willingness to accept conditions requiring the removal of the ground floor level pedestrian link through the centre of the site. The conditions will require that there are automated doors at either end of the lobby to limit access to staff and patrons of the building.ReferralsMelbourne Water Melbourne Water, pursuant to Section 56(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, does not object to the proposal as land and flood level advice at Melbourne Water indicates that the site is not subject to flooding from a Melbourne Water drain or waterway.Urban Design Council’s Urban Designer is not supportive of the plans as advertised and has recommended:?The retail tenancies fronting Wilson Street should be provided with a canopy for pedestrian weather protection.?The substation be set back to avoid the doors opening on to the carriageway of Garden Lane. A setback for the retail tenancy ‘B’, similar to that of tenancy ‘A’, would also be desirable.?The proposed pedestrian link does not make strategic connections within the neighbourhood; is not safe for the public to use; is not suitably activated; and, is not suitably proportioned (in terms of width and height). ?The proposal be revised to remove the through-block link, and re-sized to be consistent with the predominant form and scale of comparable developments in the precinct.Transport and Parking The application has been referred to Council’s Transport and Parking Department who have advised that office use is typically the easiest of all uses to mode shift away from private car use. The site is located within a Major Activity Centre, well service by public transport opportunities, near bicycle routes, and the surrounding on-street parking is restricted. In this case it is anticipated that not providing on-site car parking will mean that future staff will be forced to use public transport or sustainable modes as alternative public parking is not available. The proposed development provides 20 car spaces which are all allocated to the office use. It is recommended that the intensity of the development be reduced as the office shortfall may be too significant. It is also recommended that some staff parking is provided for the retail use. On-site customer parking may be required depending on the type of shop (should be confirmed by the applicant).Further plan details are required for the ramp width, ramp conflict, headroom clearance, sight lines, wheel stops, gradients for drainage, column locations, which will be required by way of conditions. Several car parking spaces have not been satisfactorily designed and changes to the basement layout are required to ensure suitable access to car spaces 4, 5, 6, 7, 19 and 20.The doors to the bin area are shown opening into the circulation aisle, and this cannot be supported. Doors must not open into vehicle circulation aisles. The plans show doors for the sub-station opening into Garden Lane which may result to pedestrians or vehicles striking it. In addition, if these facilities are being accessed it may impact through access along Garden Lane. The plans are to be revised setting back these facilities so open doors are entirely within the property. An area is also to be provided to allow personnel to access it without impacting Garden Lane.Although the bicycle spaces on site exceed the requirements of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, insufficient shower facilities are provided. Given the significant car parking shortfall, it is recommended that more bicycle spaces be provided. The proposal only provides twice the statutory requirement for bicycle spaces which may not be sufficient considering that only 9% of the statutory car spaces are provided on-site.Details of the proposed bicycle spaces are not shown in the plans and cannot be assessed. The plans must be revised to show the required dimensions (spacing, mounting height, aisle, etc) for assessment. Most of the proposed bicycle spaces in the basement are accessed directly from the circulation aisle of the car park. This is not acceptable. The Australian Standards requires the inclusion of a minimum of 20% horizontal floor mounted bicycle spaces. The plans show a total of 12 bicycle spaces provided via bicycle hoops, and as such this requirement is met.The development provides a delivery bay directly off Garden Lane. The delivery bay has been designed to accommodate a Small Rigid Vehicle (SRV). The Australian Standards require a service bay for SRV to be 6.4m length and 3.5m wide, and if the bay is for loading and unloading it was indicated that this must be a minimum of 2m longer and 0.5m wider than the standard space. As such, the provided area for the delivery bay is not sufficient, the plans are to be revised to show 8.4m long and 4m wide so a SRV can be accommodate. This is important to ensure that delivery personnel can loading and unloading entirely within the bay and not impacting Garden Lane.The swept path diagram shows an SRV accessing and exiting the delivery bay. The swept path shows vehicles may need to drive over the ramp kerb. This is not acceptable. The width of the delivery bay may need to be widened to ensure that vehicles can satisfactory manoeuvre in and out.WasteWhile a Waste Management Plan is not required to accompany an application for a development of this nature, a comprehensive Waste Management Plan prepared by One Mile Grid Pty Ltd dated 27 September 2018 has been submitted and this document responds well to the waste management challenges presented in the plans. City Strategy The proposed development exceeds the maximum height by approximately 17 metres. The proposed pedestrian link is a poor urban design outcome. The proposed pedestrian link is not required, and should be removed from the proposal. City Strategy does not support the proposed height and it should be amended to the preferred maximum height identified in the Activity Centre Zone – Schedule 1.InfrastructureThe proposed ground floor level is of concern and Council mapping shows that Wilson Street is also subject to flooding from drainage under the responsibility of Council and the level of this Special Building Overlay (SBO) flooding is shown to be close to the back of the footpath level. The proposed floor level at the Western end is marginally lower than the footpath level and of concern to Infrastructure. In the event that Melbourne Water do not have requirements for the site the floor level should be raised by at least 200mm to prevent possible flooding from Wilson Street. Such flooding would be exacerbated by vehicles travelling along Wilson Street and creating turbulence in the flood water.The proposed floor levels are likewise of concern as they relate to the levels of Garden Lane and are in part apparently lower than those levels. Request more detailed levels of Garden Lane and in particular show levels on the top of kerb, invert levels of the Kerb and channel and also pavement levels along Garden Lane. It appears that the proposed basement ramp simply dives off the invert of the kerb and channel and if this is the case all drainage in the channel would be directed into the basement. An apex must be created in the basement ramp that is at least at the level of the top of kerb. It is apparent that this may require a redesign of not only the access ramp but also the building above.It is critical that the above matters be resolved to prevent flooding of the development.Independently of the above comments could you please also place the following conditions:?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).?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.?All redundant vehicular crossing must be removed and the footpath and kerb reinstated at the owner’s cost to the satisfaction of Council.Environmentally Sustainable DesignThe Sustainable Management Plan must be updated to reflect the current design (plans were amended prior to advertising). It is noted that the current design proposes locating core services (lifts and toilets) to the northern fa?ade. This reduces optimal northern fa?ade glazing to office areas, reducing extent of available daylight. A better outcome would be to centralise the services, or else locate these to the southern fa?ade to maximise northern daylight access to offices.As the applicant has utilised the BESS tool and not Green Star for assessment of ESD compliance, a failure has been noted in the BESS Indoor Environmental Quality category. BESS does not provide sufficient credits to ensure a pass rate for commercial developments in the IEQ category, even if Council’s best practice standard for daylight factor of 2% to 30% floor area is met. Council’s best practice standard must be met for each floor.The applicant proposes shading to the northern fa?ade via a green screen to levels 3, 4 and 5, and fixed horizontal shading for levels 6-8. This is a good outcome. Elevations to be amended to also indicate shading for level 9.In addition, operable external shading should also be provided to the exposed upper stories (levels 7, 8 and 9) on east and west facades to minimise solar heat gain.The applicant has not met all of Council’s WSUD policy requirements (Clause 22.18). More information is required via conditions. A 15,000 litre rainwater tank has been indicated as located under the car park access ramp. The rainwater tank must be annotated to confirm connection to the required number of internal toilets (as per STORM tool) and a suitable access point for maintenance be identified. Council does not support the connection of rainwater tanks to retail outlets due to uncertainties regarding occupancy rates. The tank should be connected to office toilets for more consistent use.Despite reduction in car parking, insufficient visitor bicycle parking has been provided to meet BESS Transport credit 1.5. Visitor parking should also be provided to the southern main entrance to the site. 2 motorcycle parking spaces and 1 electric vehicle parking space with facilities are proposed which is a good outcome.A green fa?ade to provide shading is proposed levels 3-5 which is a good outcome. Planter boxes are also proposed to terraces on levels 3 and 8. However, indicative planting and location of tap and waste should be provided for terraces to ensure long-term viability of plantings.KEY ISSUESStrategic Context The purpose of the Activity Centre Zone, amongst other things, is to encourage a mixture of uses and the intensive development of the activity centre as a focus for business, shopping, working, housing, leisure, transport and community facilities, and to support sustainable urban outcomes that maximise the use of infrastructure and public transport.The site is located in the South Yarra Precinct, an area highlighted at both State and Local policy level as a place to concentrate retail, office-based employment, community facilities and services in central locations. Strategies call for commercial facilities to be aggregated and provide net community benefit in relation to their viability, accessibility and efficient use of infrastructure. Specific precinct objectives seek to support the activation of retail and commercial activity in side streets.The proposal seeks to provide a mixed-use commercial development on a large site that is currently under-utilised as a three level car parking deck operated by Care Park. Schedule 1 to the ACZ provides a number of Design and Development Requirements and Guidelines which give clear guidance on the preferred use and development outcomes sought for the site. An assessment of the relevant requirements is provided below. Activity Centre ZoneBuilding heightAs mentioned earlier in this report, the preferred maximum building height for this site as identified within the ACZ1 is 27 metres. The proposed building height of 40.5 metres exceeds the preferred maximum height by 13.5 metres. The majority of new buildings within close proximity of the subject site vary between 26 metres and 34 metres in height. The proposed building is considered to be excessively high for this precinct and should be reduced to a height more consistent with the predominant form and scale of comparable developments on nearby sites. Notably, the applicant has proposed a pedestrian link through the site as ‘significant’ community benefit to justify the exceedance in height. This link, despite being shown on the Precinct Map for the ACZ1, has since been reviewed by Council and it has been determined that this link should not be pursued (under Planning Scheme Amendment C276). In any event, Council’s Urban Designer has advised that the pedestrian link as proposed does not make strategic connections within the neighbourhood; presents public safety concerns; is not suitably activated; and, is not suitably proportioned (in terms of width and height). The pedestrian link is therefore not deemed to constitute significant community benefit and does not justify the significant exceedance in building height. The pedestrian link is to be removed through a condition of the permit which will require the installation of automated doors at either end of the lobby to limit access to staff and patrons of the building. For the reasons above, it is considered necessary to remove two floors from the upper levels of the tower to achieve a built form outcome that is more compatible with the surrounding towers. The removal of Levels 6 and 7 will reduce the building height by 7.6 metres, to an overall height of 32.9 metres. This will also subsequently remove 1410 square metres of office floor area. The removal of these two levels is preferred based on the non-compliance with the upper level street setbacks above 21 metres, as will be discussed below. As several objectors have raised visual bulk and height as a concern, the removal of Levels 6 and 7 is deemed to achieve a reasonable outcome for the adjacent properties, despite still being slightly higher than the preferred maximum height. The remaining Levels 8 and 9 are setback from all boundaries to reduce the visual dominance on the adjoining residential properties.Interface to the NorthThe ACZ1 calls for a maximum street wall height to Garden Lane of 12 metres with a 3 metre setback above the street wall up to 21 metres and a 6 metre setback above 21 metres (Type 2 interface). The proposed podium level of the office tower proposes a street wall height of 12.6 metres with a 3 metre setback for all levels above the podium up to 40.5 metres. This is not compliant with the recommended setbacks. The removal of Levels 6 and 7 by way of condition will reduce the building to a height of 32.9 metres. While the setbacks will continue to be contrary to the ACZ1, the two uppermost levels cannot be further setback from the north due to the limitations imposed by the location of the lift core and services along the northern boundary. Council’s Sustainability Officer has suggested that the lift core and services be relocated centrally or located to the south to improve access to daylight within the offices. However, the applicant submits that the location of the lift core to the north is necessary for the structural stability of the proposal; the efficient use of the site to achieve a suitable basement layout; and provides an improved visual privacy outcome for residents to the north across the lane.It is agreed that the core along the northern facade is a preferred outcome in terms of limiting the extent of office space that will interface directly with the residential properties at 20-24 Garden Street and reduces opportunities for overlooking. It is also acknowledged that the basement layout benefits from the lift core being pushed to the northern boundary. The proposed setback of 3 metres above the street wall also matches the setback of the apartment building at 20–24 Garden Street for Levels 4, 5, 6 and 7. Therefore, the setback to the north is considered to be equitable when compared to the development that has been approved and constructed directly to the north. Furthermore, given the orientation of the site, the setback will not result in any overshadowing to the northern apartments, across Garden Lane. Conditions of any permit that issues will require that the portion of the northern fa?ade, which contains the lift core and services, must be detailed on the elevations to show how the core will be treated and concealed when viewed from the north. Floor plans show sections of solid wall, however this is not reflected on the elevations. While the primary building volume above the podium levels is setback 3 metres from the boundary; a lightweight feature green fa?ade screen is proposed to abut the northern boundary from Levels 3 to 5. This structure is made up of wires or mesh that will be covered with a variety of plant species to create a vegetated, green wall. The applicant has provided advice that in-principle supports the location of the green screen; yet the specific details of the structure and plant species are yet to be provided. Importantly, the green screen requires intensive maintenance to ensure its viability. This is an element of the design that is considered positive but if not properly maintained could be unsightly. As such, comprehensive details of the green screen will be required by way of conditions including the details of the structure, plant species, soil volumes, irrigation systems and ongoing maintenance. While the green screen once established will soften the appearance of building bulk when viewed from the north, it is not considered adequate to address overlooking, especially as the vegetation may be deciduous which would result in sparse coverage in the winter. Overlooking will be discussed in greater detail below. Interface to the SouthThe same interface requirement of a 12 metre high street wall is sought for Wilson Street under the ACZ1. The proposed podium to Wilson Street matches that of Garden Lane and has a street wall height of approximately 12.7 metres above the footpath. This is deemed to be generally in accordance with the built form requirements of the ACZ1. Above the street wall the building is setback 3 metres from Levels 4 to 7 and 5.5 metres at Levels 8 and 9. As discussed above, the building is to be reduced by two floor levels, through the removal of Levels 6 and 7. This will result in a setback at the upper levels which more closely aligns with the recommendations of the ACZ1 for a Type 2 interface. The setback to the south at the uppermost levels is not limited by the core on this elevation and as such, the upper two floor levels are to be setback 6 metres in line with the ACZ1 controls and will be addressed by way of a condition. This is considered reasonable as a terrace is proposed to encroach within this setback at Level 8. The interface requirements seek to provide appropriate separation between buildings to ensure privacy, ventilation, solar access, amongst other things. The setbacks as proposed to Wilson Street will ensure that the properties on the southern side of the street, particularly the residences at No. 22-24 Wilson Street, maintain reasonable daylight, ventilation and privacy. The separation distance between these two buildings will be a minimum of 12 metres which is sufficient to limit unreasonable overlooking and overshadowing as will be discussed below. East and West (Side) InterfacesThe interface setback requirements stipulate that new buildings should be setback 4.5 metres from the side boundaries above a three storey podium up to 27 metres in height, where the setback should then increase to 5.5 metres. This is to be applied to lots that sit adjacent to existing or proposed habitable room windows and balconies. In this case, a side setback of 4.5 metres is provided at Levels 8 and 9 only. This is not uncommon in this precinct where tall buildings have been constructed with solid walls on the side boundaries. Directly to the west is a residential tower that has been constructed with a solid wall on the common boundary to a height of 25.8 metres. To the east the land has not yet been developed but is likely to undergo significant change in the near future. Given the width of this site it is expected that a future tower would not be setback from the side boundaries at Level 3 and above. Therefore, based on the surrounding development pattern a setback of 4.5 metres at the two uppermost levels is considered acceptable on this site for a commercial building. Public realm interface guidelines These guidelines encourage ground floor fa?ades to have a continuous active frontage incorporating clear glazing. The guidelines seek to conceal services from public view and locate entrances, doorways, awnings and fenestration to provide a sense of passive surveillance. The proposed retail spaces have been designed with large facades of glazing to both street frontages, which is positive. There are some services oriented to the street, including a substation to the north-east of the frontage. These services are required by the relevant authorities to be directly accessible from the street. The substation as proposed will open directly into Garden Lane which is unacceptable and creates safety concerns in the public realm for both pedestrians and vehicles. A condition of approval will require that the substation be setback from the northern boundary a minimum of 1 metre. In addition, the office has been designed with terraces at Levels 3 and 8 that facilitate passive surveillance of the public realm from upper levels to both Garden Lane and Wilson Street. As advised by Council’s Urban Designer, the retail tenancies fronting Wilson Street should be provided with a canopy for pedestrian weather protection to further enhance the public realm and improve pedestrian amenity, particularly given the breadth of the site. The plans will be required to be updated to include a canopy to Council’s satisfaction, by way of conditions. Subject to the inclusion of a canopy and the setback of the substation, the proposal complies with this guideline and will satisfactorily interface with the public realm. Materials guidelines The development will be finished in durable and low maintenance materials, such as different types of glass and precast concrete panels. The materials and finishes schedule does not confirm the reflectivity of the materials selected and this will form a condition of approval to ensure no more than 20% reflectivity. Subject to conditions, the materials selected are fitting to the varied, contemporary character of the modern towers in the precinct. The large blank wall on the eastern boundary will be finished in off-white concrete panels with a vertical and horizontal pattern. Although this is a large wall, it is acceptable as it is likely that the adjoining sites to the east will be developed to a commensurate height in the future, obscuring this large wall. Environmentally Sustainable Design (ESD) guidelinesThe applicant has submitted a Sustainability Management Plan (SMP) that confirms a BESS score of 51%, meeting Council’s best practice standard. However, the BESS Report fails to achieve the minimum score for Indoor Environment Quality (IEQ). This will be addressed via conditions. The report notes the use of high levels of acoustic insulation to internal and external walls and double glazing to all office areas. The external finishes schedule must be updated to confirm the use of double glazing. It is also noted that operable external shading should also be provided to the exposed upper stories (levels 7, 8 and 9) on east and west facades to minimise solar heat gain. All outstanding matters raised by Council’s Sustainability Officer will be addressed via conditions, should a permit issue. Open Space and landscaping requirementThe requirement seeks to provide generously sized, accessible, useable and well-designed communal open space areas in developments with more than 1,000 square metres of office. This development incorporates large terraces at Level 3 and 8 which will add to the on-site amenity of the commercial building and meet the open space requirement. Amenity ImpactsThe ACZ1 overshadowing guidelines specify that buildings and works should not cast additional shadow to the south side footpath of east-west streets between 9.00am and 3.00pm at the Equinox. This guideline may not be achievable if the building heights and setbacks specified at Clause 5 would result in overshadow to this part of the footpath.The proposed development will cast shadows across Wilson Street and onto the footpath on the southern side of the street. Although the shadows will be considerable, this is deemed to be reasonable in this context given that the ACZ1 allows a preferred 27 metre building height limit for this precinct. This preferred height and the interface setbacks would result in overshadowing to the southern footpath and therefore the shadows are expected. Although the shadows are not ideal, the proposed building is to be reduced in height by two floor levels by way of conditions, which will further reduce the overshadowing impact from the shadow diagrams provided by the applicant in support of this application. Overlooking It is important to note that as this is application is for a commercial development, the higher density residential standards do not apply. While dwellings within the Activity Centre Zone cannot expect the same level of amenity protection as dwellings in a Residential Zone, new development should seek to limit views into existing habitable room windows and balconies. NorthThe proposed office will allow views into the adjoining apartments to the north at 20-24 Garden Street. The apartment balconies and windows on Levels 1, 2 and 3 with are within 9 metres of the proposed offices on Levels 1 to 3. At this proximity, this will result in unreasonable overlooking and screening (e.g. obscure glass) will be required up to 1.7 metres above finished floor level within the new office building for the full extent of the northern fa?ade at Levels 1, 2 and to the terrace at Level 3. At the proposed Level 4 and above the offices are setback 3 metres from the north boundary. Due to the equivalent setbacks of the apartments at 20-24 Garden Street, views to the north are likely to be in excess of 9 metres. It is difficult to determine this from the plans provided, therefore a condition of approval will require screening to any glazing at Level 4 and above that allows for a view into a habitable room window or balcony within 9 metres. Sightlines will need to be provided for the proposed development if screening is not proposed. It is reiterated that the green fa?ade screen is not a suitable method of screening against overlooking. SouthTo the south the only apartment building constructed directly opposite the subject site is at 22-24 Wilson Street. This apartment building is located a minimum of 12 metres from the southern boundary of the subject site. Although the new office is located in excess of 9 metres from the adjacent apartment building to the south-east, there are several apartments that have a direct outlook towards the new office. It is recommended that some form of screening or fritted glass be incorporated to the south-east side of the building fa?ade to limit perceived overlooking from the podium levels into the existing dwellings at 22-24 Wilson Street. East and WestThere will be no unreasonable overlooking to the east and west of the subject site. Car Parking and TrafficReduction in the car parking requirementAs per the advice of Council’s Transport and Parking Department, the reduction in car parking is too significant and it is recommended that the intensity of the development be reduced. As discussed earlier in this assessment, the building is considered to be excessively high and will be required to be reduced by two floor levels via conditions of the permit. The removal of two levels of office floor area will reduce the leasable floor area by 1410 square metres, which equates to a reduction in car parking demand by 42 car parking spaces. This is considered to be an appropriate reduction and would allow for the car parking supply to more closely align with the expected demand that will be generated by the new use. Given that the site is located within a Principal Activity Centre and is located within easy reach of multiple train stations and trams on Chapel Street, Toorak Road and Commercial Road, there is strong justification to reduce the on-site parking provision. Traffic within the South Yarra Precinct is becoming more difficult and it is a broadly accepted by traffic experts that a reduction in the availability of car parking encourages a shift to alternative modes of transport. As confirmed by Council’s Transport and Parking Department, office use is typically the easiest of all uses to mode shift away from private car use. The Chapel Street Activity Centre is well known for high traffic volumes and car parking challenges. The applicant claims that provision of limited car parking is expected to ensure that traffic congestion in the area is not severely impacted by the proposed development. The subject site benefits from being well serviced by public transport opportunities, near bicycle routes, and the surrounding on-street parking is restricted to ensure that car parking caters to short term visitors of the wider activity centre. In this case it is anticipated that future staff will need to rely on use of public transport or sustainable modes of transport as alternative public parking is not available within the surrounding streets. Given the need to move people away from utilising a private car to access their place of employment when located in an activity centre, the reduction in parking can be supported in this instance. However, it has been recommended that some car parking be allocated to the retail uses at the ground floor level. This will be required by way of condition and in conjunction with a car parking management plan. Car Parking Layout and DesignThe design standards for car parking at Clause 52.06-9 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme have been applied and it is considered that there are several changes needed to the car parking layout to ensure the car parking on site is safe and functional. The plans will be required to be amended by way of conditions to ensure the ramp width, ramp conflict, headroom clearance, sight lines, wheel stops, gradients for drainage, loading bay, bicycle parking and column locations, are acceptable and in accordance with the relevant Standards. In addition, several car parking spaces have not been satisfactorily designed and changes will be required to ensure suitable access to car spaces 4, 5, 6, 7, 19 and 20.These matters are not fundamental and can be adequately addressed by way of permit conditions. Bicycle ProvisionAlthough the number of bicycle spaces proposed exceeds the statutory rate, the proposed building seeks a significant reduction in car parking. To further promote sustainable modes of personal transport it will be required that end of trip facilities be provided in accordance with Clause 52.34 and additional bicycle parking be provided at the Wilson Street frontage, within the boundaries of the subject site. Water Sensitive Urban DesignIn response to Council’s Storm Water Policy (Clause 22.18), the applicant has submitted a Water Sensitive Urban Design Response (WSUD). A response to the policy requirements has been provided which achieves a STORM rating of 101%. The level of detail provided in the Water Sensitive Design Response is insufficient and further details will be required via conditions. A 15,000 litre rainwater tank has been indicated as located under the car park access ramp. The rainwater tank must be annotated to confirm connection to the required number of internal toilets (as per STORM tool) and a suitable access point for maintenance be identified. Council does not support the connection of rainwater tanks to retail outlets due to uncertainties regarding occupancy rates. The tank must be connected to office toilets for more consistent use. This will be required to be confirmed via conditions of any permit that may issue.ObjectionsIn response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following comments are made:?Loss of viewsProtection of views 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:?Subject to conditions, the development is considered to be in accordance with the Development Framework for the activity centre and meets the relevant Design and Development Requirements and Guidelines outlined at Schedule 1 to the ACZ.?Subject to conditions, the new building does not create any unreasonable off site implications. ?The reduction in the car parking requirements of Clause 52.06 is acceptable given the location within the activity centre and within very close proximity of public transport.Attachments1.PA - 1054-18 - 11-13 Wilson Street South Yarra - Attachment 1 of 1Plans RECOMMENDATIONThat a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 1054/18 for the land located at 11-13 Wilson Street, South Yarra be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for construction of a multi-level mixed use building in the Activity Centre Zone and a reduction to the car parking requirements under Clause 52.06 subject to the following conditions:1.Before the commencement of the use and development, 1 copy of plans drawn to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans Drawing No’s TP01, TP02, TP03, TP04, TP05, TP06, TP07, TP08, TP09, TP10, TP11 Council date stamped 5 November 2018 but modified to show:a)Reduction in the overall height of the building by two floor levels by removing Levels 6 and 7;b)Screening up to 1.7 metres above finished floor level to all office glazing to the northern fa?ade at Levels 1, 2 and to the terrace at Level 3 via the use of obscure glazing or an alternative glazing treatment (such as fritted glass) that limits direct views into any adjacent residential property within 9 metres. Any alternative treatment to obscure glass is subject to the approval of the Responsible Authority; c)Screening to all office glazing to the northern fa?ade at Level 4 and above where there are views into an adjacent residential property within 9 metres unless sight lines are provided to demonstrate no views within 9 metres;d)Some form of screening or fritted glass be incorporated to the south-east side of the building fa?ade to limit perceived overlooking from the office levels into the existing dwellings at 22-24 Wilson Street to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;e)Retail tenancies fronting Wilson Street to be provided with a canopy for pedestrian weather protection to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;f)Setback the substation a minimum distance of 1 metre from the northern title boundary;g)Ground floor plan to show automated doors at either end of the lobby to limit access to staff and patrons of the building;h)The portion of the northern fa?ade which contains the lift core and services, must be detailed on the elevations to show how the core will be treated and concealed when viewed from the north to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;i)Elevations updated to note all external materials and finishes. The details must correspond with the materials and finishes schedule;j)External materials and finishes schedule to be updated to reflect the glazing and fabric assumptions included in the BESS assessment and to confirm that the use of double glazing and that the reflectivity of glass and other finishes used on the building will not exceed 20%;k)The setback of the upper two floor levels is to be increased from 5.5 metres to 6 metres from the southern boundary;l)Detailed design of the green fa?ade screen on the northern boundary, including all materials and structures that are associated with the screen;m)The width of the ramp on the top must be widened to allow satisfactory access to enter/exit the site from Garden Lane and swept paths to demonstrate that large vehicles can access the site without driving over the kerb on the east side of the top ramp;n)The delivery bay to be dimensioned to meet the Australian Standards (8.4 metres length and 4 metres wide) to ensure loading and unloading occurs entirely within the bay and not impacting Garden Lane; o)Plans to show a guide line installed in the basement to indicate where vehicles should wait to allow motorists to pass;p)A convex mirror at the bottom of the ramp is to be provided to reduce ramp conflict;q)The traffic light arrangement must provide priority to vehicles entering the car park, and the applicant is to demonstrate how this will be achieved;r)Headroom clearance confirmed as being at least 2.1 metres when the garage door is in an open position;s)The required sight lines on the east side of the ramp must be available at all times;t)The required lines of sight must be provided on both sides of the loading bay to assist exiting vehicles;u)Car space 10 to be further widened by 0.3 metres on each side to allow for door opening or alternatively the car space is to be removed;v)Wheel stops to be provided at the end of car space 7 and the accessible space;w)Plans must demonstrate that vehicles can satisfactory enter and exit car spaces 4, 5, 6, 7, 19 and 20. The dimensions of these car spaces are designed as per the Planning Scheme which allows 0.5m overhang into the aisle, this must be take into account when conducting the swept path analysis. Some corrective movement can be accepted.x)Plans to be revised to clearly show that the columns in the car park abutting the car spaces are not within the areas required to be clear;y)The doors to the bin area must not be shown opening into the circulation aisles;z)Plans to note that the minimum grade of 1 in 200 (0.5%) across undercover parking areas to be provided for drainage purposes;aa)The number of shower facilities must be provided in accordance with Clause 52.34 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme;bb)Additional bicycle parking is to be provided at the Wilson Street entrance of the building;cc)The plans must show the required dimensions (spacing, mounting height and aisle width) of the bicycle parking spaces. The bicycle spaces must not be accessed directly from the circulation aisle of the car park and must comply with the Australian Standards by providing a minimum of 20% horizontal floor mounted bicycle spaces;dd)The ground floor level raised by at least 200mm to prevent flooding from Wilson Street with no increase in the overall height;ee)Detailed levels of Garden Lane and in particular the levels on the top of kerb, invert levels of the kerb and channel and also pavement levels along Garden Lane ensuring that the proposed floor levels are no lower than the existing footpath level along Garden Lane;ff)Plans amended to show an apex in the basement ramp that is at least at the level of the top of kerb to the satisfaction of Council’s Infrastructure Department;gg)The purpose of the solar panels on the roof plan to be annotated on plans;hh)Carbon monoxide monitors for basement carpark annotated on basement plans for BESS points to be claimed;ii)Elevations to be amended to show operable external shading to the exposed upper floor levels on the east and west facades to minimise solar heat gain;jj)Fixed horizontal shading to be included to the northern glazing at the uppermost level;kk)The 15,000 litre rainwater tank must be annotated to confirm connection to the required number of internal toilets (as per STORM tool) and a suitable access point for maintenance be identified. The rainwater tank must be confirmed as being connected to the office toilets for more consistent use;ll)The waste room in basement to confirm co-location of recycling and waste. The annotation to be updated to confirm storage of recycling in order to claim BESS credit 2.2;mm)Any changes as required to meet Conditions 3 (Car Parking Management Plan), 7 (Landscape Plan), 9 (SMP), 10 (3D model), 18 (Waste Management Plan) and 20 (WSUD);all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 2.The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason, without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.3.Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a Car Parking Management Plan is to be submitted to the satisfaction of Council and it must include:a)A schedule of parking allocation allocating some car parking to the retail uses;b)Detail of the signing and line marking of parking spaces;c)Details of the traffic light arrangement that will manage vehicle entry and exit; andd)Details of the access arrangements for the bicycle facilities.4.The level of the footpaths and/or laneways must not be lowered or altered in any way.5.Prior to the occupation of the building / commencement of use, the walls on the boundary of the adjoining properties must be cleaned and finished to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.6.Lighting within the offices is to be on a timer or sensor so that the internal lights are switched off when the offices are not in use so as to minimise the spill of light beyond the office building to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 7.Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a landscape plan to be prepared by a landscape architect or suitably qualified or experienced landscape designer, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The landscape plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The landscape plan must show:a)A planting schedule of all proposed species to be planted on the green fa?ade screen including botanical names, common names, pot/planter sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant;b)Mature vegetation is to be used for the green fa?ade screen at the time of installation;c)Soil volumes for each planter to be installed on the green fa?ade screen;d)Details of the irrigation system that will support the green fa?ade screen;e)The on-going maintenance regime that will be implemented to ensure the sustained health of the green fa?ade screen;all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.8.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.9.Concurrent with the endorsement of any plans pursuant to Condition 1 a Sustainable Management Plan (SMP) must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Upon approval the SMP will be endorsed as part of the planning permit and the development must incorporate the sustainable design initiatives outlined in the SMP to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Amendments to the SMP must be incorporated into plan changes required under Condition 1. The report must include, but not limited to, the following: a)A commitment to develop a Building User Guide;b)The JV3 results indicate that the proposed building will only achieve a 5% improvement against the NCC reference building, though a 10% improvement has been claimed in the BESS tool. The JV3 results must be clarified and 10% improvement achieved;c)A commitment to provide solar panels for energy supply to be provided to off-set common area energy usage in the building (lighting, lifts etc.);d)Results of daylight performance per floor level to be provided in the daylight model to achieve Council’s best practice standard for each floor;e)Sustainable Management Plan to be updated to ensure consistency with the plans at Condition 1;f)Water Sensitive Urban Design response updated to include:i.A site plan/roof plan that clearly illustrate all drainage areas connected to the rainwater tank and the two proposed raingardensii.Design details such as cross-sections to assess technical effectiveness of the proposed raingardens. Planting for the raingardens should also be identified to ensure appropriateness. iii.An indicative site management plan for the construction phase (Melbourne Water’s guide ‘Keeping our stormwater clean: A Builder’s guide’ can be used as an example) iv.A maintenance program identifying indicative operational and maintenance arrangements for the rainwater tank and raingardens.all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.All works must be undertaken in accordance with the endorsed Sustainability Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. No alterations to the Sustainable Management Plan may occur without written consent of the Responsible Authority.10.Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, the permit holder must submit an updated digital 3D massing model of the development hereby approved in accordance with the specifications of Council’s GIS Unit, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 11.Prior to a building permit being issued, a report for the legal point of discharge must be obtained from Council and a drainage design for the development must be prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer in accordance with all ‘recommendations’ and requirements contained in that report. All drainage must be by means of a gravity based system with the exception of runoff from any basement ramp and agricultural drains which may be pumped. The relevant building surveyor must check and approve the drainage design and ensure that protection of the building is provided from a 1 in 100 A.R.I. rainfall event as required by the Building Regulations. 12.Prior to an ‘Occupancy Permit’ being issued, a suitably qualified Engineer must carry out a detailed inspection of the completed stormwater drainage system and associated works including all water storage tanks and detention (if applicable) to ensure that all works 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.13.All redundant vehicular crossing must be removed and the footpath and kerb reinstated at the owner’s cost to the satisfaction of Council.14.Any poles, service pits or other structures/features on the footpath required to be relocated to facilitate the development must be done at the cost of the applicant and subject to the relevant authority’s consent. 15.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. 16.All plant and equipment (including air-conditioning units) shall be located or screened so as to minimise visibility from any of the surrounding footpaths and from overhead views and shall be baffled so as to minimise the emission of unreasonable noise to the environment in accordance with Section 48A of the Environment Protection Act 1970 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.17.The emission of noise or any other emission to the environment derived from activities on the site must conform to standards contained in the appropriate State Environment Protection Policy or Policies. 18.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 be in accordance with the advertised Waste Management Plan prepared by One Mile Grid Pty Ltd dated 27 September 2018. 19.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.20.Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, the applicant must provide a Water Sensitive Urban Design Response addressing the Application Requirements of the Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. All proposed treatments included within the Water Sensitive Urban Design Response must also be indicated on the plans.21.The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives detailed in the endorsed site plan and/or stormwater management report.22.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 is for the use of the land and/or buildings and does not constitute any authority to conduct a business requiring Health Act/Food Act registration without prior approval from the Councils Health Services.B.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.C.Unless a permit is not required under the Stonnington Planning Scheme, signs must not be constructed or displayed without a further planning permit.D.This permit does not give any authority to occupy the footpath for trading without prior approval from Council's Local Laws department. A permit must be obtained for footpath trading and it must accord with the relevant Footpath Trading Code.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; and ii.Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires. 5.Planning Application 1330/16 - 5-15 Willoby Avenue Glen Iris- Buildings and works to a section 2 use (Education Centre) in a General Residential Zone and Heritage OverlayManager Statutory Planning: Alexandra Kastaniotis General Manager Planning & Amenity: Stuart Draffin PURPOSEFor Council to consider a planning application for buildings and works associated with a Section 2 Use (Education Centre) in a General Residential Zone and Heritage Overlay at 5-15 Willoby Avenue, Glen Iris.Executive SummaryApplicant:Tract ConsultantsWard:EastZone:General Residential Zone, Schedule 10Overlay:Incorporated Plan Overlay, Schedule 1Heritage Overlay, Schedule 120Heritage Overlay, Schedule 351Neighbourhood Precinct: Garden Suburban 4Date lodged:23 December 2016Statutory days: (as at council meeting date)NA- Failure to Determine ApplicationTrigger for referral to Council:Seven or more objectionsVCAT Hearing Date03 June 2019Number of objections:9 objections and 5 statements of grounds lodged with VCAT (2 attending VCAT hearing)Consultative Meeting:Yes– held on 04 September 2018Officer Recommendation:That Council advise VCAT and other interested parties that had a Failure to Determine appeal not been lodged, a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit would be issued.BACKGROUNDPlanning Application No. 1330/16 was lodged with Council on 23 December 2016 for the retention of a temporary portable classroom. The application was advertised in May 2018 and Council received a total of 9 objections. On 26 November 2018, the permit applicant lodged an Application for Review under s 79 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 against Council’s failure to determine within the prescribed timeframe. The matter has been listed for a 4 day hearing, commencing on 3 June 2019. Notably, five of the objectors have filed a statement of grounds with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) and two will be appearing at the hearing. The purpose of this report is to provide a full assessment of the proposal and a recommendation to the Council in relation to the position it takes to the VCAT hearing.The ProposalThe plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by Hayball Pty Ltd and are known as Drawing No.s: A-MC.01.01, A-MC.01.02, A-MC.02.01, A-MC.02.02, A-MC.03.01, A-MC.04.01, A-MC.06.01, A-MC.06.02, A-MC.06.10, A-MC.11.01, A-MC.06.01 and Council date stamped 15 February 2017.The application proposes buildings and works comprising the retention of an existing building on the site, which was constructed in 2014 as a temporary portable classroom. Pursuant to Clause 62.02-1 of the Planning Scheme, a planning permit is not required for a temporary portable classroom associated with an education centre located on a site for three years or less. As a result, no permit permission was required for this temporary portable classroom in 2014. As the proposal now seeks to retain this building on a permanent basis, this exemption no longer applies. Key features of the proposal are:?The building is a prefabricated modular building located on an area that was previously an asphalt basketball court.?The building is a single storey building that has an overall height of 4.275 metres.?The building is setback approximately 47.07 metres from Harold Avenue.?Planter boxes are located around the perimeter of the building.?The application does not propose to alter student or staff numbers or the current hours of operation of the school.After the lodgement of the application in December 2016, the permit applicant revised the application on 10 November 2017 to seek planning permission for the removal of existing restrictive covenants No. 867484, 867580 and 1118393 (details of which will be outlined in the “Title” section of this report). At the 8 March 2019 VCAT Practice Day hearing, the permit applicant sought leave to amend the application to remove the covenant removal aspect from this application. In other words, it no longer seeks to remove the existing restrictive covenants. Leave was granted by the Tribunal. As a result, the assessment of this application is confined to the retention of the temporary portable classroom.Site and SurroundsThe subject site is located on the eastern side of Harold Avenue and interfaces with Willoby Avenue to the east. The site has the following significant characteristics:?The subject site is irregular in shape, yielding a total site are of approximately 13943 square metres.?The subject site is occupied by the Caulfield Grammar School, Malvern Campus, an independent Anglican School that has been operating on the Malvern campus since 1961.?The main building on the subject site is a Victorian mansion known as Malvern House (originally known as Valentine’s, c1891). ?Malvern House and the surrounding land is identified as being of State significance, and is included on the Victorian Heritage Register.?The site includes a number of buildings and structures dispersed throughout. The built form is broken up with open space areas and open sports courts located to the north, east and west of the site.?The subject site is within close proximity to Burke Road and Wattletree Road. The Wattletree Road tram is located a short distance from the site.Whilst the subject site has been used as a school (education centre) for many years, the surrounding land is predominantly residential, comprising single and double storey detached houses. The properties neighbouring the site are as follows: ?To the north of the subject site are number of residential dwellings. A tennis court (owned by the school) is located on the northern portion of the subject site, interfacing with Dorrington Avenue.?To the east of the site is Willoby Avenue. The school is located on the western side of the street and large individual dwellings most of which are single or double storey occupy both sides of Willoby Avenue.?To the west of the site is Harold Avenue. There are many mature street trees on both the east and west sides of the street. The school is located on the eastern side of the street and large individual dwellings most of which are single or double storey occupy both sides of Harold Avenue. ?To the south of subject site are a number of residential dwellings.?All of the dwellings in Dorrington Avenue, Willoby Avenue and Harold Avenue surrounding the subject site are affected by Heritage Overlay- Schedule 351.Previous Planning Application(s)The subject site has an extensive planning history and many planning permits have been issued for a wide range of buildings and works projects in the past.The TitleThe site at 5-15 Willoby Avenue Glen Iris is described on two different parcels of land on the following Certificates of Title:?Certificate of Title Volume 10077 Folio 129 as Land in Plan of Consolidation 352196D. This parcel of land is encumbered by restrictive covenants No. 867580 and No. 1118393.?Certification of Title Volume 10037 Folio 756 as Lot 4 of Plan of Subdivision 45764. Restrictive covenant No. 867484 encumbers this parcel of land. The plan of subdivision also shows a drainage easement on the northern, eastern and southern side of the land.As shown in Figure 1 below, the portable classroom is located within the parcel of land that is subject to Covenant No. 1118393. Figure 1: location of the protable classroom and various parcels of landCovenant No. 1118393 inlcudes the following restrictions:a)Firstly - that if the land is subdivided into lots:i)The owner will not erect or build on the land more than one detached private dwelling house or residence on (one on each Crown Portion);ii)The house is to be constructed of reinforced concerete brick or stone with roof of slate or tiles;iii)The cost of the house must not be less than ?800 (exclusive of fencing and outbuilding); and iv)The land must not be used for anything other than residential purposes.b)Secondly – i)The land will not be used as a quarry or brick marking operation;ii)There shall not be any carrying away of marl stone earth clay gravel or sand from the land; and iii)There can be no hoarding for advertisement erected on the land.c)Thirdly, the land shall not be subdivided without the consent of a number of named parties. Council officers have sought independent legal advice which has confirmed that the proposal (i.e. retention of the portable classroom) will not breach Covenant No. 1118393.Covenant No. 867484 prohibits the construction of any building other than a private dwelling house of one storey and usual outbuildings. Covenant No. 867580 states:a)That marl stone earth clary gravel or sand may not be removed from the land;b)No building be erected on the land except a private dwelling house and the outbuildings appurtenances thereto;c)That not more than one building may be erected on the land which shall be not subdivided;d)No building shall be erected of material other than brick or stone or reinforced concrete with roof of slates or titles;e)Such building shall not be of less cost than ?600 (exclusive of fencing and outbuilding);f)The land may not be used for quarrying or brickmaking operations;g)No hoarding for advertisements can be erected on the land.Council’s legal consultants are of the view that because the existing portable classroom is not erected on the parcels of land that are encumbered by Covenants No. 867484 and No. 867580, these two covenants are not relevant to the application. In other words, the proposal will not breach these two covenants. As discussed above, the application originally sought permission to remove these covenants. However, the permit applicant has now abandoned this aspect of the application.Planning ControlsThe following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:ZoneClause 32.08- General Residential ZonePursuant to Clause 32.08-8, a planning permit is required to construct a building or carry out works for a use in Section 2 of Clause 32.08-2.OverlaysClause 43.01 - Heritage Overlay (Schedule 120 and Schedule 351)The subject site (Malvern House) and the surrounding area is affected by Heritage Overlay- Schedule 120 which is on the Victorian Heritage Register (VHR0379) and Heritage Overlay- Schedule 351 being the Dorrington Estate Precinct Glen Iris. Pursuant to Clause 43.01-3 a permit is not required under this overlay to develop a heritage place which is included in the Victorian Heritage Register. Heritage Victoria are the relevant authority under the Heritage Overlay Schedule 120. Heritage Victoria has provided comments that indicate that no permit is required for the school to retain the classroom on the land. Therefore, the only consideration of the application is as it affects Heritage Overlay –Schedule 351 being within the Dorrington Estate Precinct.Pursuant to Clause 43.01-1 a permit is required to demolish or remove a building, to construct a building or to construct or carry out works.Clause 43.03- Incorporated Plan Overlay (Schedule 1)Pursuant to Clause 43.03-1, a permit granted must:?Be generally in accordance with the incorporated plan, unless a schedule to this overlay specifies otherwise.?Include any conditions or requirements specified in a schedule to this overlay. Schedule 1 to the Incorporated Plan Overlay specifies that a permit may be granted to construct a building or construct or carry out works before an Incorporated Plan has been incorporated into the scheme. There is no Incorporated Plan included in the planning scheme for Caulfield Grammar School.Particular ProvisionsClause 52.06- Car ParkingThere is no statutory trigger to provide any new car parking on the subject site as the number of students is not being increased.Clause 52.34- Bicycle FacilitiesAs noted above, there is to be no change in the number of students on the site or the number of staff and therefore no new bicycle facilities are required under Clause 52.34-5. General ProvisionsClause 62- Uses, Buildings, Works, Subdivisions and Demolition not requiring a Permit.It is noted that Clause 62.02-2 states any requirement in this scheme relating to the construction of a building or the construction or carrying out of works, other than a requirement in the Public Conversation and Resource Zone does not apply to: ?A temporary portable classroom associated with an education centre located on a site for three years or less.Clause 63- Existing UsesPursuant to Clause 63.05 a use in Section 2 or 3 of a zone for which an existing use right is established may continue provided: ?No building or works are constructed or carried out without a permit. A permit must not be granted unless the building or works complies with any other building or works requirement in this scheme. ?Any condition or restriction to which the use was subject continues to be met. This includes any implied restriction on the extent of the land subject to the existing use right or the extent of activities within the use. ?The amenity of the area is not damaged or further damaged by a change in the activities beyond the limited purpose of the use preserved by the existing use right.Relevant Planning PoliciesClause 9 Plan MelbourneClause 11 SettlementClause 15 Built Environment and HeritageClause 15.03 HeritageClause 19.02-2S Education FacilitiesClause 21.02 OverviewClause 21.03 VisionClause 21.06 Built Environment and HeritageClause 21.08-5 Community InfrastructureClause 22.04 Heritage PolicyClause 22.05 Environmentally Sustainable DesignClause 22.16 Institutional Uses PolicyClause 22.18 Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design)Clause 32.08 General Residential ZoneClause 43.01 Heritage OverlayClause 43.03 Incorporated Plan OverlayClause 63 Existing UsesClause 65 Decision GuidelinesClause 22.23 (Neighbourhood Character Policy) does not apply to Institutional Uses as listed in Clause 22.16, of which the school is listed. AdvertisingThe 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 East Ward and objections from 9 different properties have been received. The concerns can be summarized as follows:?Neighbourhood Character.?Heritage?Parking and traffic.?Amenity impacts.?Concerns in regards to the initial temporary structure of the building.?Increase in student number at the school over time.?A masterplan should be prepared.A Consultative Meeting was held on 04 September 2018. The meeting was attended by Councillors Atwell, Davis and Klisaris, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council Planning Officer. The meeting did not result in any changes to the plans. ReferralsHeritageCouncil’s Heritage Advisor reviewed the plans and their comments are summarised as follows:?The proposed building is modest in scale, and is located to the northern side of the principal facade where it will only have a modest impact in views to the service wing of Malvern House as seen from Harold Avenue.? ?The proposal to make the existing structure permanent can therefore be supported.Heritage VictoriaIt is noted that when that application was lodged, only Malvern House was registered under the Victorian Heritage Register. Following advertising of the application, Council was advised that the extent of registration had been extended and covered the location of the portable building. Comments received from Heritage Victoria on 30 July 2018 confirmed that no permit is required. The response from Heritage Victoria is outlined below:?As you are aware, the heritage registration of Malvern House was amended (updated) on 6 July 2018. The amendment included:-Adding land to the extent of registration to offer sufficient curtilage to provide a setting and to protect the cultural heritage values of the place.-Adding a permit policy and permit exemptions to allow works which would assist in the appropriate management of the place.- Re-formatting the Statement of Significance to bring it up to date.As a result of this amendment, any proposed new works or development which are within the new extent of registration (including Malvern House, and surrounding land and other buildings) require approval from Heritage Victoria to be undertaken (unless they are specifically listed as being exempt works).In response to your request for confirmation as to whether approval is required from Heritage Victoria for the temporary building to remain in its current location, I can confirm that no approval is required because the building already exists on site. The amendment to the heritage registration was undertaken after this building was placed in its current location. However, should any change occur to the location of the building, or there is a physical alteration to the structure itself, then approval will be required from Heritage Victoria because these are new works/development.KEY ISSUESStrategic ContextPlanning policy encourages the integration of education facilities within local communities. Infrastructure should be provided in response to social needs, and the efficient use of existing infrastructure is encouraged. At the local level, Clause 21.08-1 outlines that addressing the need for social and physical infrastructure is a focus for future development planning in Stonnington. Clause 21.08-5 seeks to acknowledge the importance of public institutions to the economic and social viability of the City and recognises that addressing the potential impacts of many institutional uses on residential amenity in residential areas is a key issue.Clause 21.02-3 (key influences and challenges) identifies the management of the location, expansion and increased levels of use of educational, medical and institutional uses and their integration into the community and established residential areas as a challenge. Clause 21.08-5 (community infrastructure) seeks to ensure the effective management and community integration of the use and development of institutional uses including health, education and recreational facilities. Clause 22.16 (Institutional Uses policy) seeks to accommodate the future use and development needs of institutional uses, whilst ensuring they take place in an orderly manner and are complementary to the surrounding residential context.Clause 21.04-4 (Commercial and community uses in residential zones) seeks to ensure that non-residential uses in residential zones are located to achieve maximum accessibility to the communities they serve, respect the preferred character of the area and respect residential amenity. The proposed development to retain the existing building seeks to rationalise and improve the facilities at the existing school. The school is located within close proximity to a number of Neighbourhood Activity Centres and has excellent access to public transport services. The proposal to retain the existing learning centre building on the site is consistent with broader State Planning Policy directions. Whilst there is strategic support for the proposed redevelopment of the school in terms of its use, operation and contribution as a community service, the proposed built form and amenity impacts are also key considerations.Relevant built form policies include Clause 15 which outlines that high quality urban design outcomes be achieved and contribute to the local urban character, amenity and safety of the public realm. Clause 21.06 also includes objectives and strategies relating to amenity, and built form character. In addition, Clause 15.03 (Heritage) seeks to provide for the conservation and enhancement of places which are of aesthetic, archaeological, architectural, cultural, scientific, or social significance. Development should respect places with identified heritage values and create a worthy legacy for future generations. The local heritage policy at Clause 22.04 includes similar objectives. The application addresses these policies as the building to be retained is a single storey building in the northern aspect of Malvern House.HeritageThe main building on the subject site is a Victorian mansion known as Malvern House (originally known as Valentine’s, c1891). ?Malvern House and the surrounding land is identified as being of state significance, and is included on the Victorian Heritage Register as VHR No. H379.? As outlined in the referral section of the report, Heritage Victoria has provided comments that indicate that no permit is required for the school to retain the building on the land. Consideration of the proposal within the broader Dorrington Avenue Heritage Overlay Precinct (HO351) is required.Given that the building is located within a residential area, it is considered appropriate to apply the residential policy (rather than the policy for commercial buildings. Clause 22.04-4.5 states the following in regards to new buildings:?Ensure that new buildings:-Are readily identifiable as new buildings while respecting and having minimal impact on the significance of the heritage place.-Retain vistas and viewlines to significant places.?Ensure that new buildings complement adjacent significant or contributory places and the prevailing character of the precinct with regard to:-Height, street wall height, scale, mass, setbacks, orientation, roof forms, fenestration and general form.-Relationships between solids and voids and the form and arrangement of window and door openings.-Materials, detailing, finishes and colour scheme.?Discourage new built form in front of the primary building volume of significant or contributory places.In this case, the building complies with the objectives of the policy as it is located so that primary views to Malvern House are retained, is setback 47 metres from the streetscape and is readily identified as a new building. It is acknowledged that building sits in front of the side wing of the significant building (Malvern House), however given the single storey form of the building it ensures that the building does not detract from the primary building volume of Malvern House and maintains key view lines to Malvern House from Willoby Avenue and Harold Avenue. The building is setback appropriately from the streetscape at a distance of approximately 47.07 metres from Harold Avenue. In addition the building will not be visible from Willoby Avenue to the eastern side of the site as it is located behind school buildings that front Willoby Avenue. The setback of the building from Harold Avenue is considered generous and will allow the original heritage building (Malvern House) to remain the prominent built form on the site.In regards to the building, it is a commonly held view that new works can be supported on heritage buildings where they are sympathetically integrated to provide a clear delineation between the old and new fabric. In saying this, the building is considered to be sympathetic and complementary to the original heritage fabric. The use of colorbond roof sheeting, timber decking and colorbond metal materials are appropriate to clearly distinguish the building to Malvern House. Overall, it is considered that due to the setback and design of the building, it will not dominate or detract from the original heritage place (Malvern House) or the wider heritage precinct. As confirmed by Council’s Heritage advisor the proposal to make the building permanent can be supported.Built FormThe building provides a modern learning environment that sits comfortably within the streetscape. In terms of the building height, the building is a single storey building that has an overall height of 4.275 metres. The low height of the building and good setbacks allows adequate separation between the building and the residential dwellings and ensures there is minimal impact to the dwellings or the streetscape through the appearance of bulk.The materials of the proposal are sympathetic to the streetscape as the building has a neutral colour palate of white colours which ensures the colours and materials of the dwellings within the streetscape. Planter boxes have also been located around the building which allows for a softening of the building. As such, the built form of the building is considered to be acceptable.Amenity ImpactsThe building is internal to the school site and is separated from residential dwellings by existing school buildings or by the street. Whilst Clause 54 is not applicable to the assessment of a non-residential building, a number of the objectives and standards are considered appropriate to use as a guide in assessing the proposal and to test whether it would have an unreasonable impact on surrounding dwellings. The nearest residential dwelling is at No. 17 Willoby Avenue, located 25 metres to the north of the building. There will be no overshadowing impact on adjacent residential properties, impact on daylight to existing windows or unreasonable overlooking opportunities. The same considerations are reached when considering the buildings relationship with properties that address Harold Avenue.TrafficAt the consultation meeting and within the objections some objectors have raised concerns with traffic and parking impacts on the surrounding streets. Importantly, this application only applies for the retention of the building rather than the operations of the campus. The retention of the building will not result in an increase in students or staff members as confirmed by the applicant in writing or result in an increase in floor area or site area of the school, therefore Clause 52.06 is not triggered.Environmentally Sustainable Design and Water Sensitive Urban DesignAs the building is in excess of 100m2 a Sustainable Design Assessment and Water Sensitive Urban Design response is required in accordance with Clause 22.05 (Environmentally Sustainable Development) and Clause 22.18 (Stormwater Management) of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. The application was not accompanied by a Sustainable Design Assessment or Water Sensitive Urban Design Response, these will be required as a condition of any permit issued.ObjectionsIn response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following comments are made:?Increase in student numbers at the school over time.As there is no increase in student numbers proposed as part of the application for buildings and works, this cannot be considered as part of this planning application.?A masterplan should be prepared.Many objectors are frustrated with the continuous expansion of the school over time. They submitted that the school should submit a masterplan so as to provide Council and local residents with certainty regarding the intended long term development of the school and how issues such as car parking and additional built form are to be managed.Council’s Institutional Uses Policy at Clause 22.16 encourages the preparation of masterplans and outlines the process through which the preparation of the masterplan ought to proceed. However, as the Tribunal pointed out in The King David School Holdings Pty Ltd v Stonnington CC [2004] VCAT 239, Clause 22.16 appropriately recognises the masterplan and planning permit processes are interchangeable. Therefore, the lack of a masterplan does not impose a barrier to the consideration of the planning permit application nor does it deprive residents of their fair participation in the planning permit application process. Whilst it may be desirable to have a masterplan for various reasons, the absence of a masterplan does not warrant a refusal of the application for the reasons below:Firstly, there is no statutory requirement for the preparation of a masterplan. The subject land is affected by an Incorporated Plan Overlay (IPO). Schedule 1 to the IPO states a permit may be granted where no plan is incorporated in the scheme. If a masterplan was considered to be essential, the Scheme would have required such a plan be completed before a permit can be granted.Secondly, the planning permit process provides an efficient and fair process to assess use and development applications on their merits. The absence of a masterplan is not an impediment to assessing proposals on their planning merits.Thirdly, approval of a masterplan requires considerable time and effort by many parties and therefore may be unable to respond to changing technology, student needs, funding and regulations. This may explain why so few masterplans have been incorporated under Clause 22.16 and the Incorporated Plan Overlay Schedule 1. In the incorporated plan overlay section of the Stonnington Planning Scheme only one school (Loreto Mandeville Hall) has an incorporated plan.In summary, the absence of a masterplan does not prohibit the current application from being assessed and considered by Council.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 building is sympathetic to the heritage streetscape.?The form, scale, design character and materiality of the building is an appropriate response to the neighbourhood character of the area.?The building will not result in any unreasonable amenity impacts on the adjacent residential properties.Attachments1.PA - 1330-16 - 5-15 Willoby Avenue Glen Iris - Attachment 1 of 1Plans RECOMMENDATIONThat Council advise VCAT and other interested parties that had a Failure to Determine appeal not been lodged, a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 1330/16 would have been issued for the land located at 5-15 Willoby Avenue Glen Iris for buildings and works to a Section 2 Use (Education Centre) in a General Residential Zone and Heritage Overlay subject to the following conditions:1.Before the commencement of the development, 1 copy of plans drawn to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans council date stamped 15 February 2017 but modified to show:a)Any changes as required by Condition No. 3.b)Any changes as required by Condition No. 5.All of the above to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.2.The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.3.Concurrent with the endorsement of any plans pursuant to Condition 1 a Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA) must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Upon approval the SDA will be endorsed as part of the planning permit and the development must incorporate the sustainable design initiatives outlined in the SDA to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Amendments to the SDA must be incorporated into plan changes required under Condition 1. The report must include, but not limited to, the following: 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 addressedb)Identify relevant statutory obligations, strategic or other documented sustainability targets or performance standardsc)Document the means by which the appropriate target or performance is to be achieved d)Identify responsibilities and a schedule for implementation, and ongoing management, maintenance and monitoring.e)Demonstrate that the design elements, technologies and operational practices that comprise the SDA can be maintained over time.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.4.Prior to the occupation of the development approved under this permit, a report from the author of the Sustainable Design Assessment, approved pursuant to this permit, or similarly qualified person or company, must be submitted to the Responsible Authority. The report must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and must confirm that all measures specified in the Sustainable Design Assessment have been implemented in accordance with the approved plan.5.Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, the applicant must provide a Water Sensitive Urban Design Response addressing the Application Requirements of the Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. All proposed treatments included within the Water Sensitive Urban Design Response must also be indicated on the plans.6.The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives details in the endorsed site plan and or stormwater management report.7.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.This property is located in a Heritage Overlay and planning permission may be required to demolish or otherwise externally alter any existing structures. External alterations include paint removal and any other form of decoration and works, but do not include re-painting an already painted surface.C.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. 6.Caroline Gardens - Hit Up WallActing Manager Urban & Infrastructure Projects: Simon McKenzie - McHarg Acting General Manager Assets & Services: Rick Kwasek PurposeTo further consider the potential installation of a tennis hit up wall within Caroline Gardens. BackgroundCaroline Gardens is a local scale park within South Yarra. The park was upgraded in January 2019 with the new facilities including a larger central lawn area, paved forecourt, new seating, lighting, additional trees and garden beds, irrigation and a new playground. The new park has been well received within the community. Refer to attachment 1- photos of the new park.The Gardens are predominantly used by local residents, office workers, parents, children and dog walkers, providing good passive recreational opportunities for the local community. Tennis hit-up wall The reinstatement of a tennis hit-up wall has been a request by some members of the community to replace a demolished factory wall previously used informally for tennis. The wall was demolished as part of a residential development which now has lounge room and bedroom windows as well as balconies and courtyards directly facing into the park. The potential reinstatement of the tennis hit-up wall has been influenced by two key factors:1.Whether a tennis wall is now an appropriate facility within the new gardens; and2.Planning permit requirements of the adjoining apartment complex Some of the local community viewed the tennis wall as a valued asset and as such expressed a desire for the developer to reinstate it in its previous location. The adjacent residents have argued that a wall, and the additional required fencing within, on or near the property boundary would have serious implications to their amenity, specifically, blocking sunlight into balconies, courtyards and windows, visual amenity, outlook to the park and the additional noise and miss-hit tennis balls associated with the activity.Planning Permit requirements A planning Permit No. 200/11 was issued by Council at the direction of VCAT on 11 September 2012. The permit was issued subject to a number of conditions, including Condition 3(a) which required the owner to enter into a Section 173 Agreement with Council with regard to remediation works within Caroline Gardens. Condition 3(a) was (at the time) worded as follows:The owner/developer must enter into discussions with Council to reach agreement on the remediation of the areas in Caroline Gardens impacted by the demolition and development of 22-32 Toorak Rd & 37 Caroline Street, South Yarra. Once the protection/remediation plan has been agreed to the satisfaction of both parties, this plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must provide comprehensive details of reinstatement works in Caroline Gardens, including a replacement tennis wall, BBQ, garden beds, seating, landscaping and paving and the works must be constructed at the full cost of the owner/developer and under the supervision, and to the satisfaction of, the Responsible Authority and completed prior to the occupation of any buildings on the land. Amendment application to remove/relocate the tennis wallDespite agreeing to the Remediation Plan, the Permit holder(s) has long sought to remove the requirement to re-erect the tennis abutting the common boundary. This is, according to the Permit Holder(s), due to the amenity implications such a wall would produce to the approved apartments at this interface.To pursue this desired change, a Section 72 (Planning and Environment Act) Amendment Application was submitted to Council on 13 October 2016 and further amended on 11 April 2017. The application sought to alter the wording of Condition 3(a) to remove reference to the 'replacement tennis wall'.A Section 178A request was also made to Council on 1 March 2017 to amend the wording of the Section 173 Agreement which applies to the titles of the land by deleting reference to the replacement of the tennis wall within Caroline Gardens. Both the Section 72 Amendment Application and the Section 178A request were considered by Council at its meeting on 21 August 2017. At this meeting, Council resolved to: ?Not provide ‘in principle’ support pursuant to Section 178B of the Planning & Environment Act 1987 for the amendment to the S173 Agreement.?Refuse the Application to Amend Condition 3 a) of Planning Permit No: 200/11VCAT Application and hearingThe Applicant appealed Council’s decision to refuse the amendments sought. A final hearing was set down for April 2018. Prior to the hearing, the Applicant amended its application to:a.Remove the request to delete the words “replacement tennis wall” from condition 3(a); andb.Amend the Remediation Plan (RP) endorsed under the Permit to show two potential locations for the replacement tennis wall:i.Option 1 sought to build the tennis wall against the existing east facing brick wall of the toilet block. The tennis wall would be approximately 2.3 metres high, to avoid blocking the ventilation grilles of the existing toilet, and 4.8 metres long. The existing service attached to the toilet wall would need to be replaced in the event that this option is accepted. ii.Option 2 sought to build the tennis wall adjacent to the garden beds which run perpendicular to the apartments.The VCAT decisionA ruling from a VCAT hearing listed for 23 and 24 April 2018 recommended that a tennis hit-up wall be constructed perpendicular to the property boundary at the eastern end of the existing tennis asphalt area. However, as Council are land owners of Caroline Gardens, its duty is not just as the administrator of the Stonnington Planning Scheme but also as the Public Land Manager. The Public Land Manager tasks fall outside the realms of the Stonnington Planning Scheme and as such the VCAT planning decision cannot compel Council to decide how best to manage or develop its land. Council are therefore free to install a hit up wall, not install a hit up wall or choose the most appropriate alternative more suited to this location. Potential options to substitute the wall with other more appropriate facilities were considered by Council at its meeting of 19 November 2018. At that meeting Council resolved as follows;1.a further report be prepared for Council consideration providing detailed options for provision of a tennis hit up wall in Caroline Gardens including the following locations:a) reinstatement parallel to the original alignment (along the northern boundary), within the land owned and managed by Council; b) installation perpendicular to the northern boundary along the western edge of the existing asphalt, adjacent to the public toilet block; c) installation perpendicular to the northern boundary along the eastern edge of the existing asphalt;All options are to incorporate suitable protective netting to reduce the risk of balls entering the abutting property, and to address the relevant provisions of the Building Regulations 2018.2.the interested parties be notified of the request for a further report, and be provided with an update on the delivery of the proposed park improvement works. DiscussionDetailed options for the tennis hit-up wall are shown on attachment 2- Tennis hit-up wall locations and described below:In order to inform the consideration of each wall option, Council officers engaged consultants to provide professional advice from the perspective of: ?Urban Design for advice on the implications to safety, amenity and aesthetics to park users and adjoining residents?Sports and leisure planning for advice on the appropriateness of a tennis hit-up wall facility within a park of this scale and?Acoustic engineering for advice on the expected noise impacts the facilities will have on the adjoining residents. It is noted that the advice received from each consultancy was not supportive of a tennis hit-up wall within such close proximity to an apartment complex. Urban Design Advice- Land Design PartnersLand Design Partners Pty Ltd assessed each of the three options individually, as each has varying implications on the surrounding residents and park users. (See Attachment 3 – Land Design Partners Urban Design Response) Option A - Northern BoundaryThe proposal for a wall in this location provides a direct replacement for the previous informal use of the factory wall. Due to the proximity to residents, this option requires a 1.75m offset from the property boundary to meet building regulations, in turn reducing the already limited playing surface.Strengths:?Orientation has low potential for miss-hit balls to be directed into the adjacent play space?Allows for the hard paved hit up space to be connected to the adjacent play space, creating a multi-purpose space.Weaknesses:?boundary conditions – habitable rooms, windows and terraces?direct cover of the courtyard of an apartment, impacting on light?miss hit balls may hit the boundary apartments?views directed towards the apartments?noise generated from ball play?reduced passive surveillance?reduced playing surface due to wall offset ?potential ‘secluded’ area behind wall?loss of public space to create buffer ?reduced visual amenity/ aesthetics with additional required fencing Option B - Wall on western edge of asphaltStrengths:?orientation reduces the potential for miss-hit balls to be directed into the adjacent play space?allows for the hard paved area to stay connected with the play space?minimises concealed areas Weaknesses:?boundary conditions – terraces, windows and habitable rooms ?miss hit balls will impact the apartments/ terraces as well as land on the toilet roof?noise generated from ball play?this location is a ‘double up’ with walls to front and rear, of varying heights?toilet service cabinets require access, which will need to be closed off / fenced to control ‘secluded’ access to rear of wallOption C - Wall on eastern edge of asphaltStrengths: ?Redirects ball play away from the property boundary?Allows views out of the residential apartmentsWeaknesses:?miss hit balls will be directed towards the play space and may still impact boundary apartments?noise generated from ball play?reduced passive surveillance by wall blocking sight lines?disconnects the hard surface from the play space, making a smaller, disparate play area, with limited direct visual and physical accessLand Design Partners considers the hit up wall, regardless of location, a compromise between amenity and usability and generally not appropriate with weaknesses greatly outweighing strengths. They question the suitability of this as a recreation element and to reconsider the provision of a hit up wall in this location.Sports & Leisure Planning Advice- Otium (See Attachment 4 – Otium Report) Otium’s assessment of the proposal to incorporate a tennis hit-up wall within a local park found that, ‘when considering a potential site for a tennis hit-up wall facility, the site should ideally be at least 0.5Ha; have good surveillance; active transport access; and should not be immediately adjacent to a residential area/development’ (Otium report Pg. 1). In response to this, Caroline Gardens 0.2Ha, significantly less than the recommendation and the gardens directly adjoins residential properties on the northern and southern boundaries. Whilst the park itself has good surveillance and access to public transport, the specific locations of the hit-up wall within the park create opportunities for anti-social behaviour. In their report, Otium also state that key considerations for tennis hit-up wall design should include ‘the provision of an adequately sized playing space (at least 10m distance out from the wall)’ and ‘the preferred wall alignment, from a play perspective is east-west, with side-screens at 45 degrees. Hidden space behind the wall should be avoided, with only passive artificial lighting provided for the playing space. Noise generation and amplification (e.g. by tall adjacent buildings) should be a consideration’ (Otium report Pg. 1).In response to this, the maximum available distance of any of the three options is approximately 8.5 meters, significantly less than the recommendation of a minimum of 10 meters. Whilst two of the three options can achieve an east-west alignment, they produce other negative urban design implications relating to safety and access as discussed within the Urban Design advice above. Noise generation and the implications to residents is discussed below.Acoustic engineering advice- Marshall Day Marshall Day Pty Ltd is a well-regarded and experienced acoustic consultant who was asked to provide independent advice on the installation of a tennis wall within Caroline Gardens. (See Attachment 5 – Marshall Day Acoustic Report)Marshall Day’s assessment of the impact on adjoining residents in relation to noise found that all three options would have similar negative impacts and that no option was ‘advantageous compared to each other’ (Marshall Day report Pg. 4).Marshall Day’s nominated design targets for appropriate noise levels in adjoining residents is shown in the table below:Day & EveningNight TimeLocation inside dwellingsTime averaged noise level (Laeq) in dBMaximum noise level (Lamax) in dBBedroom3540InaudibleLiving Areas4045Noise targets for average and maximum noise levels in dB.As shown above, the acceptable noise level at night should be inaudible for the adjoining residents. In discussing the proposed wall options, Marshall Day state that ‘proposing a hit-up wall in proximity of a building envelope and window to habitable space means noise is inevitable – and ability to achieve inaudibility inside dwellings will be problematic’ (Marshall Day report Pg. 4).Whilst appropriate materials for construction of the wall will reduce the decibel level of the activity, none will achieve an inaudible noise level at night. As such Marshal Day’s recommendation for mitigation against noise at night is not through construction methodology or material type but rather through ‘implementation of appropriate managerial measures to ensure use of the rebound wall occurs during daytime and evening only’ (Marshall Day report Pg. 4). Outside of lighting provision, this response would be difficult to enforce from a Council resource and compliance perspective. Adjacent resident objectionsWhilst there is resident support for the reinstatement of the tennis hit-up wall from the wider community, residents most affected by the outcome of this decision are those living directly adjacent to the proposed facilities. Consultation originally occurred prior to the occupation of the adjacent premises. More recently following the occupation of the apartment block the adjacent residents have engaged with the proposal to reinstate the wall and voiced their opposition. As such, consideration of the impacts on adjacent residents should be reconsidered. Reduced access to sunlight, diminished amenity and higher concentration of noise will most likely occur if the wall was to be reinstated, regardless of the orientation. Many of the residents directly affected by this outcome have written to council to voice their concerns. A casual tennis wall was an appropriate feature of the park in its previous form with a factory to the north which was used as an informal hit up wall. Since the development of apartments to the north of the park the replacement of a wall for tennis hit up presents a challenge for council as land managers. The suggested options for the wall outlined above present potential ongoing management issues. As Public Land Managers Council has an opportunity to include an alternative to tennis hit up more suited to a park of this scale and location. Position Summary Upon obtaining expert independent consultant advice as well as the consideration of the adjacent apartment block and more recent objections from the adjacent development, implementing a hit-up wall in any of the three proposed locations is not considered an appropriate treatment. Earlier reports have recommended alternative facilities which would be more suitable with the location and scale of the space, including public table tennis or climbing boulder. These options have been outlined below. Alternative option 1- Climbing Boulder An entry level bouldering unit with features for beginners through to regular users is suggested in the space (See Attachment 6 – Climbing Boulder). The play piece acts as a standalone climbing structure with sufficient space for a fall zone and additional markings on extended rubber soft fall surfacing such as hopscotch etc. With the connection to the playground there is an opportunity to extend the soft fall and connect the two spaces for a much more integrated feel. The positioning of the climbing structure allows for screen planting and improved garden beds to the adjacent development. A key feature is that the piece adds a level of diversity to the playground for multi age use which aligns with a community suggestion during consultation. Alternative option 2 – Public Table Tennis An outdoor ping pong table is also a suggested option and would provide increased activity, vibrancy and engagement for a range of ages and ability (See Attachment 7 – Ping Pong Table). Ping pong tables have been installed in numerous locations around the world including local municipalities of Yarra and Port Phillip and have proved very successful. In terms of equipment these can be supplied by the users, not unlike tennis, or a partnership can be formed with a local café which is quite common. The ping pong table has sufficient space for a fall zone and additional markings on extended rubber soft fall surfacing such as hopscotch etc. With the connection to the playground there is an opportunity to extend the soft fall and connect the two spaces for a much more integrated feel. The positioning of the ping pong table allows for screen planting and improved garden beds to the adjacent development. The Ping-Pong table adds a level of diversity to the playground which encourages use by all age’s from the young to the older age community. This aligns with a commentary from the community during consultationPolicy ImplicationsThere are no know policy implications associated with council choosing to reinstate or not reinstate the tennis hit-up wall. Financial and Resources ImplicationsWith the exception of a $25,000 bond held over the developer, Council have exhausted all currently available financial resources through construction of Caroline Gardens. Should Council choose to implement the hit-up wall, or if an alternative facility be chosen, it is proposed that the held bond be allocated to this. ConclusionFollowing the most recent report to Council on possible alternate options for the hit up wall in Caroline Gardens, Council officers were requested to provide a detailed assessment of three potential locations for the facility. This was undertaken taking into consideration impacts on the adjoining residential properties, local community expectations and relevant professional advice. Advice sought from Urban Design, Sport and Leisure Planning and Acoustic engineering found that re-instatement of a tennis hit-up wall in any of the three locations would have significant negative impact on the amenity of the adjoining residents and park users. Specifically, these implications were:?reduced outlook onto gardens?miss hit balls into balconies?reduced passive surveillance ?increased opportunities for anti-social behaviour?reduced amenity and aesthetics with the additional required fencing and gates ?inappropriateness of a hit up wall within the size and scale of the park ?limited available playing surface area ?increased noise of activity Having regard to the consultant’s advice in relation to the negative impacts on both park users and the adjoining residents, it is recommended that the tennis hit-up wall not be reinstated and an alternative treatment of the space be considered.Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation has no know implications relating to the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.Attachment 1 - PhotographsExcluded2.Attachment 2 - Wall ConceptsExcluded3.Attachment 3 - Land design Partners ReportExcluded4.Attachment 4 - Otium ReportExcluded5.Attachment 5 - Marshall Day Acoustic ReportExcluded6.Attachment 6 - Bouldering play equipment Excluded7.Attachment 7 - Public Ping Pong TableExcluded RecommendationThat Council:1. Notes the advice provided be expert consultants in relation the tennis hit-up wall options.2.Not proceed with the reinstatement of the tennis hit-up wall in any of the three proposed locations3.Undertake consultation on the Ping Pong and Climbing Boulder proposals as alternative options to the hit up wall.4.A further report be brought to council on the outcome of the consultation 5.The interested parties be notified of the outcome of this report 7.Power House Rowing Club Lease RenewalManager Leisure & Wellbeing: James Rouse General Manager Community & Culture: Cath Harrod PurposeThe purpose of this report is to seek approval a new 15-year lease agreement between Council and the Power House Rowing Club, with conditional terms, for part of the land located at 164?Alexandra Avenue, South Yarra.BackgroundThe Power House Rowing Club funded and built its rowing shed in 1970 on land leased from the former City of Prahran and has since occupied the site under various lease agreements with Council. The Club’s initial ten year lease was renewed in 1986 by the City of Prahran for a 15 year term and expired in February 2001. In July 2000, Council resolved to provide a 12-month extension to the lease as a number of issues pertaining to the future development of the rowing precinct were unresolved. In the absence of any decision regarding the rowing precinct, the agreement was continually held over on an annual basis until 2012. The key terms of a new lease were negotiated in 2012 and the required statutory procedures were undertaken. At its meeting of 25 June 2012 Council considered the matter of the Power House Rowing Club lease and resolved:1.That having followed the required statutory procedures pursuant to section 190 and 223 of the Local Government Act, Council resolves to lease 164 Alexandra Avenue South Yarra to the Power House Rowing Club Inc. to the 28 February 2014 with two (2) options for a further term of two (2) years with other terms and conditions as approved by the Council’s Chief Executive Officer. The reason for the decision being:(i)The Power House Rowing Club provides variety, affordable and accessible rowing opportunities and activities to the general Stonnington community which promote community health, wellbeing, fitness and recreation.(ii) Provides the Power House Rowing Club with some security of tenure to allow for ongoing service delivery to the community and for forward planning in the medium term. 2.Following entering into the new lease with the Power House Rowing Club, as per recommendation 1:That:1.Council advertise its intention to enter into a Lease with the Power House Rowing Club pursuant to Section 190 and 223 of the Local Government Act for a period not exceeding 30 June 2027 with the first term of the lease to 30 June 2017, with two (2) five (5) year options subject to.a.A long term business plan being provided by the Power House Rowing Club to the satisfaction of Councilb.The option terms being conditional on agreed Key Performance Indicators being met.c.The new lease if entered into by Council and the Power House Rowing Club would supersede any existing lease.d.The terms and conditions of the new lease being to the satisfaction of Council's Chief Executive OfficerAs a long-term business plan was not provided to Council and KPIs not developed and agreed, a five year lease with two five year options was not pursued. The current 3x2-year lease agreement, ending 28 February 2018, has now expired and the Power House Rowing Club is occupying the building in an over holding arrangement. DiscussionThe Power House Rowing Club is seeking a new lease that supports its medium-term planning and enables the securing of sub-letting arrangements. Officers have undertaken an assessment of the Club and determined its suitability for a longer-term lease. In order to proceed with the preparation of a new five-year lease, with two further options to extend for five years – a lease period that will extend beyond 30 June 2027, there is a requirement for Council to pass a resolution that supersedes the standing resolution from 2012.The principles applied in Council’s 2011 Community Facilities Leasing & Licencing Policy were used to assess the Power House Rowing Clubs’ suitability for a longer-term lease. The Policy determines that negotiating the term of a lease agreement should account for the unique circumstances of the facility and the tenant, including community need and benefit, capital investment and long-term planning, sustainability of the service provided, and the connection between the facility use and Council’s strategic objectives.The Power House Rowing Club is the only community rowing club in Stonnington with approximately 120 active members, and provides a full calendar of events and social activities. The Club offers a developmental pathway via the Learn to Row program and caters for a large contingent of Masters Rowers. Females represent the majority of Club memberships and constitute 75% of the executive committee. The Club Committee is currently developing a strategic plan to incorporate the Club’s Mission, Vision, Values and success measures which, where relevant will align with Council’s Plan and Recreation Strategy. A paid employee has also been appointed by the Committee to strengthen community engagement and explore opportunities to make the facility more appealing to a broader community base.The Power House Rowing Club estimates that it has funded in excess of $200,000 in upgrades to the rowing shed in the past six years, including renovations to the change rooms, gymnasium, office and committee room; electrical upgrades; remodelling of the interior tank; new racking; new walkways and decking and; the installation of safety railing. In addition, the Club plans to replace the roof and flooring, and install an awning for weather protection at a total project cost of $161,734.In recognition of the Club’s recent capital investment and plans for further development, it’s diverse rowing program and demonstrated inclusive practises, a new five-year lease with two options to extend for a further term of five years each is recommended. The lease will be reviewed to include conditions regarding appropriate utilisation, aligned to the Council’s objectives.Policy ImplicationsCouncil’s Community Facilities Leasing & Licence Policy was used to inform the basis of the assessment determining the Club’s eligibility for a longer-term lease and, where practical will be used to determine the lease terms.Financial and Resources ImplicationsThe Club will continue to be responsible for the maintenance and any required or desired upgrades of the building at no cost to Council. A new lease fee will be informed by a recent valuation of the land and negotiated and confirmed as one of the terms and conditions of a new lease.Legal advice & implicationsCouncil’s legal representative and/or specialist property lawyer will review the lease before the lease is finalised. Subject to the satisfactory completion of sections 190 and 223 of the Local Government Act, CEO approval to enter into a new lease with the Power House Rowing Club will be sought via a further CEO Notice Paper.ConclusionThe Power House Rowing Club is seeking a new lease that supports its medium-term planning and ongoing service delivery. To recognise the Club’s recent capital investment, it’s strong financial position, diverse rowing program and continued commitment to community development, provision of a new five year lease with two options to extend for a further term of five years is recommended. Council’s resolution of 25 June 2012 limiting the lease to a period that does not extend beyond 30 June 2027 needs to be amended to enable this objective.Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006. RecommendationThat Council:1.authorise officers to prepare a new lease for the Power House Rowing Club for a term of five years with two further options to extend for five years subject to:1.1.a long-term business plan being provided by the Power House Rowing Club to the satisfaction of Council;1.2.the option terms being conditional on agreed Key Performance Indicators being met; and1.3.the terms and conditions of the new lease being to the satisfaction of Council's Chief Executive Officer. 8.Floodlight Trial at Romanis Reserve and Malvern Cricket GroundManager Leisure & Wellbeing: James Rouse General Manager Community & Culture: Cath Harrod PurposeThe purpose of this report is to present the findings from the trial of the use of the floodlights at Romanis Reserve and Malvern Cricket Ground to provide an opportunity for casual recreation between June and September 2018. BackgroundThe City of Stonnington funds and maintains floodlights at 15 sportsgrounds across the municipality. Floodlights are used exclusively by sports clubs between two and five nights per week from April to September to facilitate midweek sports training and occasional match play. A shortage of open space in Stonnington means that in some areas, sportsgrounds constitute the most accessible and preferred public open space for residents. Those that opt to use sportsgrounds at times when they are not otherwise in use by sports clubs rely on overspill from street lighting, or natural light which diminishes as early at 5.30pm in winter. In response to requests from residents for use of Romanis Reserve during the evening in winter, a trial for the use of the existing floodlights on nights when the sports field was not allocated for organised sport was conducted for a nine week period during August and September 2017.Response to the initial trial was positive albeit from a limited number of survey respondents. On 7 May 2018 Council resolved to:1.Endorse a further trial for the remainder of the winter season of the use of floodlights at Romanis Reserve for casual recreation on Monday and Wednesday nights from June to September 2018. 2.Nominate a trial at a secondary site for use of floodlights for casual recreation. 3.Undertake further pedestrian counts and more community engagement to inform a review of the trial. A second floodlighting trial commenced in June 2018 and ran until the end of September. Malvern Cricket Ground was nominated as the secondary site.DiscussionThe 2018 trial was held on Mondays and Wednesdays from 11 June to 26 September 2018. Mondays and Wednesdays were selected on the basis that neither Orrong Romanis Reserve nor Malvern Cricket Ground was required for organised sport. Floodlights were activated from 5.30pm to 8.30pm using an automated timer inserted into the floodlight switches. A letter advising residents of the trials was circulated to 638 households within 500m of Malvern Cricket Ground and 1,569 households within 500m of Romanis Reserve. Signs were also erected at each site. Community feedback was gathered throughout the trial by way of pedestrian counts, pedestrian surveys and online surveys. Pedestrian counts were undertaken on six evenings across June, July and August. Interview surveys were conducted on four nights in July and August. An online survey was available to park users and non-park users for the duration of the trial.A summary of the pedestrian counts taken at Romanis Reserve and Malvern Cricket Ground is provided in Attachment 1. Results of the interview survey data for Romanis Reserve and Malvern Cricket Ground is provided in Attachment 2. Online survey data for Romanis Reserve is provided in Attachment 3. Online survey data for Malvern Cricket Ground is provided in Attachment 4. 2018 Trial Results: Romanis Reserve Pedestrian counts reported an average of 56 people using Romanis Reserve on Mondays and 92 on Wednesdays during the trial period. This represented an overall decrease of approximately 12% from usage reported as part of the 2017 trial, however 2018 interview and online survey data suggest that more than 75% of those that attended Romanis Reserve during the 2018 trial did so as a direct result of the floodlights being on.A total of 45 park users were interviewed at Romanis Reserve. Of those, 96% considered the floodlighting times suitable and 71% reported visiting the ground more since the trial began. Local residents were the majority patrons with 71% of respondents visiting the reserve with their dog and 89% living within 2km of the reserve.Thirty-two responses were received to the online survey. Of those, 97% were supportive of permanent lighting for passive recreation. The most popular attendance time was 6.30-7.30pm (71%). 41.9% of people visited from 5.30pm-6.30pm and 51.6% from 7.30-8.30pm. Wednesdays (97%), Mondays (90%) and Fridays (74%) were nominated as the most desired evenings for permanent floodlighting. Approximately 50% of respondents indicated a preference for lighting on Saturday and Sunday evenings also.Of the 25 additional comments received to the online survey all bar one was supportive of permanent lighting for passive recreation. It was considered that lighting would encourage greater use of Romanis Reserve by improving safety and sense of safety, increase physical activity among residents during the winter months, improve animal management by facilitating greater access to the reserve for dog walking and enable dog walkers to see and pick up after their dog.2018 Trial Results: Malvern Cricket GroundUse of Malvern Cricket Ground during the trial period was less than Romanis Reserve. Pedestrian counts reported an average of 33 people using Malvern Cricket Ground on Mondays and 29 on Wednesdays. Comparatively lower usage levels may in part be due to reduced residential density and that floodlighting can be seen from fewer neighbouring households. Half of those interviewed reported finding out about the trial via the onsite signs, 29% by word of mouth and 21% by seeing the lights on. No respondents interviewed reported learning about the trial via the resident notification letter. A total of 24 park users were interviewed at the Malvern Cricket Ground during the trial. Of those, 50% indicated that they would not have been there if not for the lighting and 50% reported using the oval more during the trial. Approximately 62% of those interviewed lived within 2km of the ground and 58% visited with dogs. 42% of those interviewed drove to the ground, while 46% walked and 13% caught public transport. Twenty-five responses to the online survey were received. Of those, 11 people indicated that they would not visit Malvern Cricket Ground during the trial which suggests that non-park users were represented in the survey results. 13 respondents were supportive of permanent lighting in the evening, 9 were not supportive and 3 were neutral. Among those that were supportive, Mondays (81%), Wednesdays (75%) and Fridays (50%) were the most desired evenings. All the interview survey respondents at Malvern indicated that the time the lights were on each evening was suitable. Of the 14 online survey respondents 10 of the 14 respondents indicated that they had or would visit between 5:30pm and 7:30pm during the trial whereas only one indicated that they had or would visit between 7:30pm and 8:30pm.Policy ImplicationsA key pillar of the Council Plan 2017-2021 is Liveability, aiming to make Stonnington the most desirable place to live, work and visit. This initiative is facilitated by Council’s investment in open spaces and sporting fields and optimises their use in response to community needs.The Municipal Public Health and Wellbeing Plan 2017-2021 includes Active and Healthy Lifestyle and Community Safety as two of its strategic priorities. This initiative encourages increased physical activity across all life stages, and provides public spaces and places people can enjoy and feel safe.Stonnington’s Recreation Strategy 2014-2024 aims to create the healthiest and most active community in Victoria. This will be achieved by providing inclusive and sustainable sport and recreation opportunities and facilities where our community can achieve physical and mental wellbeing. A priority area of the strategy is Accessible Facilities. This initiative supports the action underpinning this priority to identify opportunities to increase the use of existing parks and sporting precincts for casual and unstructured recreation opportunities, and demonstrates an innovative option to activate high density areas where open space provision is low.Financial and Resources ImplicationsThe total cost of the 2018 floodlighting trial was $7,335. This included the cost of pedestrian counts and interview surveys undertaken by Austraffic at a cost of $3,875; the installation of a timeclock in the floodlight switches at the Malvern Cricket Ground at a cost of $2,500 and; electricity consumption costs totalling $960 for both sites. Council currently maintains, upgrades and replaces floodlight facilities across the municipality. A decision to activate the floodlights at Romanis Reserve and/or Malvern Cricket Ground on an ongoing basis would incur an estimated cost to Council of $5 per hour, per ground on account of electricity consumption only. ConclusionThe 2018 floodlighting trials provide evidence that lighting sportsgrounds for passive recreation increases use of open space and physical activity during the winter months. Residents are more likely to visit reserves with lighting due to an increased sense of safety. Animal management is improved as a result of increased visibility. It is anticipated that attendance of any floodlit reserve would increase over time owing to greater public awareness of amenity provisions, and an ability for residents to plan, program and establish their evening routine. The large attendance of Romanis Reserve and positive community response to evening lighting at the reserve suggests clear support for ongoing provision of floodlighting to accommodate passive recreation at Romanis Reserve on the same days and times as were provided for during 2018. Lower recorded attendance and mixed community feedback from the trial at Malvern Cricket Ground suggests that a reduction in the hours and/or days of use might strike a more appropriate balance. Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.Pedestrian CountsExcluded2.On-Site Interview Survey ResponsesExcluded3.Online Survey Results - Romanis ReserveExcluded4.Online Survey Results - Malvern Cricket GroundExcluded RecommendationThat Council:1.Activates floodlighting at Romanis Reserve on Mondays and Wednesdays until 8.30pm from 29 April – 2 October 2019 to facilitate casual recreation;2.Activates floodlighting at Malvern Cricket Ground on Mondays until 8.00pm from 29 April to 30 September 2019; and 3.Monitors the use of Malvern Cricket Ground on Mondays evenings between 5.30pm and 8.00pm in 2019. 9.Burke Road, Glen Iris - Proposal to Alter Parking RestrictionsStudent Traffic Engineer: Arian Menxhiqi Manager Transport & Parking: Ian McLauchlanInterim Chief Executive Officer: Simon Thomas PurposeTo provide an update on discussions with abutting property owners/occupiers regarding parking restrictions on the west side of Burke Road, from property 255 to the Right-of-Way (RoW), and to re-consult the community on a new proposal for alternate parking restrictions. BackgroundStreet CharacteristicsBurke Road is a state arterial road which runs in a generally north-south alignment from Lower Heidelberg Road in Ivanhoe East to Dandenong Road in Malvern. The subject section is in Glen Iris between Malvern Road and Carroll Crescent. This section of Burke Road is wide, with multiple traffic lanes and a tram reserve. As a consequence there is significant separation between the east and west sides of the road. The kerbside parking on the west side is the subject of this report. The abutting land use is commercial at the street level. Some properties have residential dwellings above. Gardiner Station is located to the north end of the subject area. The subject section of this parking is between Burke Road and the unnamed Right-of-Way (RoW) and is highlighted in the plan below.Parking CharacteristicsThere are approximately 9-10 parking spaces available in the subject section of Burke Road. Parking bays are marked, however there is an extended bay at the southern end subject to a ?-HOUR time limit that may accommodate 2 smaller vehicles, or 1 larger vehicle, hence the 9-10 spaces approximation. A further 2 parking bays are located to the north of the RoW, but were not included in the proposal, as they primarily abut railway land, and are prioritised for rail commuter pick-up and drop-off (kiss and ride). Resident parking permits do not grant an exemption for any parking along this section of Burke Road, as it abuts commercial land use, and is on an arterial road.There is some off-street parking available at the rear of the shops, accessed via the RoW.Existing Parking Restrictions The 9-10 parking spaces available on-street are covered by a range of parking restrictions, the current configuration of which were installed in July 2018. The extended parking bay at the southern end is covered by ?-HOUR restriction operating 9am to 9pm on all days. The next marked parking bay to the north is covered by a ?-HOUR restriction operating 9am to 6:30pm, followed by a MAIL ZONE restriction operating 6:30pm to 7:00pm Sunday to Friday. The next 2 marked parking bays moving north are covered by a ?-HOUR parking restriction operating 9am to 9pm all days. The remaining 5 marked parking bays are covered by ?-HOUR parking restriction operating 9am to 9pm all days. The existing parking restrictions in this section are outlined munity Submission The current ?-HOUR and ?-HOUR parking restrictions were installed in July 2018, following consultation which occurred in April 2018, and a report to Council. Since the installation, traders at some of the commercial tenancies have raised concerns with officers regarding the short duration of the restrictions, and that the restrictions do not serve the majority of the businesses. A multi-signatory letter was received on 31 October 2018, signed by 8 property occupiers/owners representing 8 properties/tenancies. The multi-signatory letter raised concerns regarding the newly implemented restrictions and the effect they are having on customers in the area. A request was made to replace the existing on-street parking with a mixture of 1-HOUR and ?-HOUR restrictions. The letter stated that the current restrictions are inadequate, and do not cater to the needs of the abutting businesses. In order to ensure that any proposal put to the community matched the expectation of the signatories of the letter, officers provided a plan of the existing restrictions, and requested the signatories mark up the plan showing their desired parking configuration. The mark-up, received 28 December 2018, was slightly different to the original request, and showed a 1-HOUR restriction operating from 9am-6pm and 2-HOUR restriction operating 6pm-9pm. A proposal was further developed including a combination of 1-HOUR parking in the daytime (9am to 6pm) and 2-HOUR parking in the evening (generally 6pm to midnight). The MAIL ZONE restriction currently in place would not change. This captured the intent of the submitter’s proposal, but also would be enforceable. The proposal developed is shown below. Consultation UndertakenThe request in this case came from a group of traders, and included a specific request for changes to parking abutting their properties. The majority of abutting commercial properties signed the submission, and therefore it was considered reasonable to re-consult the community with a new proposal. A circular was distributed to residents and traders abutting properties between Malvern Road and the rail line on 31 January 2019 with the following proposal:?Install 1-HOUR parking restrictions operating 9am to 6pm all days from property 255 to the RoW;?Install 2-HOUR parking restrictions operating 6pm to midnight all days from property 255 to the RoW (except for the MAIL ZONE space); and?Retain the existing MAIL ZONE restriction and install a 2-HOUR parking restriction operating 7pm to midnight all days for the MAIL ZONE space.DiscussionA total of 58 properties were distributed the circular with 13 replies received, equating to a 22% response rate. The responses received are shown in the table and graph below.ProposalSupportOpposedNo OpinionNo ResponseInstall 1-HOUR and 2-HOUR Restrictions7(12%)6(10%)0(0%)45(78%)Of the 58 properties distributed the circular, 47 are not commercially rated. The residents of non-commercial properties have a right to comment on the proposal, but the parking abuts commercial properties, and it is reasonable to prioritise this parking for commercial uses. The below table shows a breakdown of the responses for the non-commercial and commercial properties.ProposalSupportOpposedNo OpinionNo ResponseNon-Commercial2(4%)1(2%)0(0%)44(94%)Commercial5(45%)5(45%)0(0%)1(9%)The parking change abuts commercial properties, so the responses from commercial operators should be given more weight in this case (in situations where residents seek restrictions abutting residential properties, the opinions of nearby traders are treated similarly). This was the process used in considering the last change of parking restrictions.The response from commercial properties was mixed, split evenly with equal numbers in favour and against the proposal. A summary of the comments received is shown below. Typical ResponsesOfficer ResponseIn favour of the proposal-Perfect.-100% agree with this plan.-Strongly support proposed changes.-This will be much better than present 15-MINUTE restrictions.-I voted against the proposed in July because I knew traders would be affected.-It would be better with no time limits after 2pm on Saturday and all day Sunday to allow for visitor parking.-Nil.Opposed to the proposal-Disagree to the designated times proposed. Suggest 1-HOUR 9am-9pm. Also suggest 2 car spots 15-MINUTE 9am-9pm.-2-HOUR parking is not workable as it won’t allow turnover. Recommend 1-HOUR 9am-9pm but for the 2 bays near the RoW be 15-MINUTE 9am-9pm. This will ensure customers and deliveries can find parking.-Recommend 1-HOUR 9am-9pm all days but the 2 bays near the RoW be 1/4P 9am-9pm all days.-Parking must be able to turn over to allow customers for shops on the strip to access the businesses in the day and evening for those that operate either during the day or evening or both. Recommend 1-HOUR 9am-9pm all days but the 2 bays near the RoW be ? HOUR or ? HOUR 9am-9pm all days.-Agree with the MAIL ZONE restriction, but think there should be different restrictions on weekends/ public holidays.-It appears that respondents that objected to the proposal generally are in favour of 1-HOUR restrictions operating 9am-9pm and have 2 parking bays near the RoW be ?-HOUR operating 9am-9pm.Those opposed to the proposal provided some detailed and lengthy responses. A consistent theme in the response from those objecting was a preference for a different change to the parking restrictions than what was proposed. Those opposed to the proposal were specifically not in favour of the 2-HOUR parking in the evening. Trader respondents opposed to the proposal indicated that parking turnover is required in the evening and as such, a 1-HOUR restriction operating from 9am to 9pm would be preferred. Respondents also suggested that the 2 parking bays closest to the RoW be ?-HOUR operating from 9am to 9pm to ensure there is at least 2 parking opportunities with higher turnover. Respondents considered this alternative to be a good balance between short and long term parking.This has been outlined in the image below. Option for CouncilGiven the community feedback, it is proposed that the current proposal be abandoned and further consultation be undertaken on an alternate arrangement, specifically 1-HOUR restriction operating 9am to 9pm, with 2 bays near the RoW to be ?-HOUR operating from 9am to 9pm. It should be noted that traders in the area have different requirements and a proposal to meet all of the traders needs may not be possible.ConclusionThe proposal to alter the existing restrictions to 1-HOUR during the day and 2-HOUR in the evening was mixed, with 7 in favour and 6 opposed, with 45 properties not responding. In considering responses from commercial properties, there were 5 in favour, 5 opposed, and 1 did not respond. As there was a mixed response to the proposal submitted, it is recommended that the community be re-consulted on a revised proposal to install:?1-HOUR restriction, operating from 9am to 9pm all days, for the first 7 line marked bays (except the second line marked space).?1-HOUR restriction, operating from 9am to 6:30pm and from 7pm to 9pm all days, for the second line marked space (retaining the MAIL ZONE operating from 6:30pm to 7pm SUN-FRI).??-HOUR restriction, operating from 9am to 9pm all days, for the last 2 line marked spaces (south of the RoW). Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006. RecommendationThat:1.The current proposal to alter parking restrictions be abandoned;2.Consultation be undertaken on an alternative proposal as described below;-1-HOUR restriction, operating from 9am to 9pm all days, for the first 7 line marked bays (except the second line marked space).-1-HOUR restriction, operating from 9am to 6:30pm and from 7pm to 9pm all days, for the second line marked space (retaining the MAIL ZONE operating from 6:30pm to 7pm SUN-FRI).-?-HOUR restriction, operating from 9am to 9pm all days, for the last 2 line marked spaces (south of the RoW). 3.Those previously consulted be advised of this decision, and consulted with the new proposal outlined above; and4.A further report be prepared for Council consideration following the consultation proposed above. 10.Public Art Commissions - Cato SquareManager Arts, Culture & Economy: Eddy Boscariol General Manager Community & Culture: Cath Harrod PurposeThe purpose of the report is seek Council’s endorsement of the commission of two site specific public artworks for Cato Square, Prahran.BackgroundThe City of Stonnington’s Art in the Public Domain Policy supports the commissioning of innovative, high quality, contemporary artworks by professional artists. Art located in the public domain is the most accessible and visible art form. New works can provide iconic representation to a place, playing a significant role in enhancing the urban environment and creating a shared sense of place. Public art can reflect time and place, community or civic history and identity, humanise the built environment and invigorate public spaces.In June 2018, Council called for Expression of Interests to develop an artwork specifically intended to be installed within Cato Square, Prahran. Expression of Interests for the commission detailed the background and history of the site, as well as specific concept and design considerations, budget and timeline. DiscussionThe Expression of Interest for Cato Square Public Art Commission closed on Friday 8 June 2018. Submissions were reviewed by Dr Geoff Hogg of the Stonnington Art Acquisition Panel and Council's previous Visual Arts Officer. Five artists were shortlisted and invited to submit a public art proposal and present to a selection panel. The selection panel comprised of the Manager Urban and Infrastructure Projects, Visual Arts Officer, Coordinator Economic Development, Arts and Tourism and General Manager Community and Culture, along with Lyon’s Architect’s representative Adrian Stanic and Stonnington Art Acquisition Panel representative Dr Geoff Hogg. The artist recommended by the panel was not supported by the Cato Street Steering Committee. Based on feedback provided by the Committee and the Art Acquisition Panel representative Dr Geoff Hogg, the new Visual Arts Officer approached an additional three Australian artists in February 2019 to submit artwork commission proposals for the Council’s consideration. Two of the artists approached submitted artwork proposals which were presented to the Cato Street Steering Committee at its meeting of 20?March?2019. The Committee were supportive of the proposals, which are presented in this report for Council consideration. Adrian Stanic from Lyon’s architecture has also noted his support of the proposed artworks and locations, and will continue to be involved in discussions.Proposal 1: Jamie NorthThe first artist proposal is from Sydney-based artist Jamie North. A copy of the artwork proposal and artist CV is provided as Attachment 1. The proposal was highly regarded in accordance with key selection criteria as outlined in the Art in the Public Domain Policy including:Calibre of artist and or team: Jamie North has been represented by Sarah Cottier Gallery in Sydney since 2012. His work has been widely exhibited both in Australia and internationally including through major commissions for the 20th Biennale of Sydney in 2016; the National Gallery of Victoria in 2015 and the Istanbul Biennial in 2015. North’s work is held in many public collections including the National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne; Monash Museum of Modern Art, Melbourne and MONA, Hobart. Strength of artistic and conceptual merit and its relevance and appropriateness to the site, community and environment: Jamie North’s continually evolving and ‘living’ sculptures represent the intersection of the natural and the man-made. The forms are constructed of cement which has been imbedded with industrial materials (such as coal ash and steel) and then planted with native Australian plants which are sustained by inbuilt irrigation tubes cast within the sculptures and will continue to grow and change over time. The proposal has well demonstrated appropriateness to site with geographic and cultural links through its integration of nature and architecture. The work also links to Cato Square’s urban forest. Capacity to deliver with appropriate consideration of durability and safety of the work: Jamie North’s well documented experience with large scale public art demonstrates expertise and capacity to deliver the artwork created with durable materials designed to be outdoors in public space. Proposal 2: Dr Fiona FoleyThe second artist proposal is from Queensland-based artist Dr Fiona Foley. A copy of the artwork proposal and artist CV is provided as Attachment 2. The proposal was highly regarded in accordance with key selection criteria as outlined in the Art in the Public Domain Policy including:Calibre of artist and or team: Dr Fiona Foley is an art curator, writer and academic as well as a recognised contemporary artist. She is founding member of Boomalli Aboriginal Artist Co-operative and is represented by Andrew Baker in Queensland. She exhibits regularly in Australia and internationally and in 2017 was part of the major exhibition Defying Empire: 3rd National Indigenous Art Triennial at the National Gallery of Australia, Canberra and completed her PhD with Griffith. In 2017, Dr Foley was also appointed Adjunct Professor to Gnibi College of Indigenous Australian Peoples at Southern Cross University. In 2014, she was the recipient of an Australia Council Visual Arts Award. She is a regular keynote speaker at conferences and symposia all over the world and has undertaken major public art commissions in Brisbane and Mackay. Strength of artistic and conceptual merit and its relevance and appropriateness to the site, community and environment: Dr Foley’s art practice often references Indigenous histories and commonalities across cultures. The proposed artwork commission comprises three cast aluminum native bees, which, though joyful and playful, clearly demonstrate the artist’s great respect for the insects. Historically, native bees were an important food source for Aboriginal nations across Australia. The native bee is also a social insect that can survive only as a member of a community and as pollinators are crucially important within both the local and global ecosystem, including within urban landscapes like Cato Square. Capacity to deliver with appropriate consideration of durability and safety of the work: Dr Fiona Foley’s well documented experience with large scale public art demonstrates expertise and capacity to deliver the artwork created with durable materials for outdoor, public display. She will be working with long-time, experienced collaborators United Art Projects (UAP) to fabricate the sculptures. Policy ImplicationsThe commission of public art for Cato Square aligns strongly with the:?Art in the Public Domain Policy: Supports the commissioning of innovative, high quality, contemporary artworks by professional artists.?Arts and Cultural Strategy: Broadly seeks to position the City of Stonnington as a creative city where arts and culture are valued and promoted.?Council Plan: Commits to 'enhance the design outcomes of public spaces, places and buildings'.Financial and Resources ImplicationsThe final commissions for Cato Square have a total budget of $200,000 in the 2018/19 Capital Works program X9714 - Sculptures in Public Realm.$90,000 will be allocated to each artist to commission their project ($180,000 total), with the remaining funds reserved for administration including submission proposal fees; artist travel to supervise installation; and contingency.Legal advice & implicationsTwo artist agreements will be entered in to between the City of Stonnington and the artists outlining deliverables. ConclusionIn accordance with Council's Art in the Public Domain Policy, Council is seeking to commission site specific public artwork for Cato Square in Prahran. Following a targeted proposal submission process, it is recommended by the Art Acquisition Panel and the Cato Square Steering Committee that the proposals from Jamie North and Dr Fiona Foley are endorsed. Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.Attachment 1 - Jamie NorthExcluded2.Attachment 2 - Dr Fiona FoleyExcluded RecommendationThat Council:1.Endorse commission of public art works as proposed by both Jamie North and Dr Fiona Foley for Cato Square, Prahran 11.Re-purposing of the Chadstone Girl Guide Hall, Malvern EastManager Leisure & Wellbeing: James Rouse General Manager Community & Culture: Cath Harrod PurposeThe purpose of this report is to seek approval to renovate and repurpose the former Chadstone Girl Guide Hall located at 51 Ivanhoe Grove, Malvern East to accommodate the East Malvern Men’s Shed.BackgroundThe Chadstone Girl Guide Hall was built in the early 1970s on Council land leased by the Girl Guides Association of Victoria and occupied by the Chadstone Girl Guides until December 2018.Under the terms of each lease agreement with Council, the Girl Guides Association has been responsible for all building maintenance, improvement and renewal works. While the hall’s structural integrity has remained largely intact, the building has received little work and has subsequently deteriorated over time. A 2015 condition audit commissioned by Council confirmed the need for approximately $66,000 worth of maintenance recommended over a two year period. On 29 August 2018 the Girl Guides Association of Victoria wrote to Council with a request to end their current lease and surrender ownership of the Chadstone Guide Hall to Council on the basis that they could no longer afford to manage the building. Arrangements were made by the Girl Guides to relocate to the Ivanhoe Grove Scout Hall situated on land adjacent to the Guide Hall. This relocation option was considered both convenient and economic, allowing for the Chadstone Girl Guides to continue their operations with minimal change while significantly reducing overheads. Council ended its lease with the Girl Guides Association on 1 January 2019 and assumed possession of the Chadstone Guide Hall. An opportunity now exists to reactivate the Hall for alternative community use. DiscussionThe East Malvern Men’s Shed was established in 2015. With a membership base of approximately 24 people, it is the only Men’s Shed in Stonnington providing a range of activities including wood work, welding, cooking, bike riding, men’s health talks and computer classes. The East Malvern Men’s Shed actively support the local community and have ambitions to expand their program. The space which they currently occupy within East Malvern RSL is prohibitively undersized, limiting growth and attendance capacity as well the activities that can be safely undertaken. In addition to this, the East Malvern RSL have asked the Men’s Shed to vacate the premises by November 2019. Representatives from the East Malvern Men’s Shed were invited by Council to view the Chadstone Guide Hall on 8 February to assess its suitability as a potential relocation option. Their response was overwhelmingly positive, confirming that the hall was suitable in size, location and amenity, and that renovated, would provide enormous potential for growth and development. Officers are now seeking approval from Council to repurpose the former Chadstone Guide Hall to accommodate the East Malvern Men’s Shed.Dennis Hunt and Associates Pty Ltd were appointed in January 2019 to undertake a condition, asset and risk assessment of the building to determine the maintenance required and estimated cost of returning the hall to a habitable and compliant condition. This included compliance with the Building Codes of Australia (BCA) and Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). A cost summary of works estimated a required sum of approximately $250,300 (excl. GST), including $197,300 for maintenance and renewal, and a further $53,000 for disability compliance. Recreation Services has submitted a 2019/20 budget bid in the amount of $200,000 to contribute to the cost of renovating the hall. A number of grants are also available, including the Men’s Shed Funding Program offered by the Victorian State Government which provide grants of up to $80,000 towards new shed builds and the refurbishment of existing buildings. Policy ImplicationsProvision of a facility that supports the growth and development of the East Malvern Men’s Shed aligns with the following Council strategies: ?Positive Ageing Strategy 2018-2021 by delivering quality and accessible infrastructure and; facilitating responsive, inclusive and affordable services and programs.?Council’s Plan 2017-2021 by providing facilities that support community engagement, health and wellbeing through all stages of life.?Council’s Access and Inclusion Plan by providing renovations that are DDA compliant and include improved accessibility and access features.?Municipal Public Health and Wellbeing Plan 2017-21 by promoting and providing for healthy and active lifestyles among men and male older adults. Financial and Resources ImplicationsTo make good the former Chadstone Guide Hall will require approximately $250,300. Officers have submitted a 2019/20 budget bid of $200,000. The remaining funding required will be sought via the 2019/20 Men’s Shed Funding Program and/or future budget bids. ConclusionSurrender of the Chadstone Girl Guide Hall in December 2018 has provided a unique opportunity to repurpose the building for alternative community use. The relocation of the East Malvern Men’s Shed to the former Guide Hall will support the health and wellbeing of local men, fostering community spirit and connectedness, and contributing to building a more inclusive community.Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006. RecommendationThat Council:1.approve the renovation and repurposing of the former Chadstone Girl Guide Hall for occupancy by the East Malvern Men’s Shed; and2.approve officers applying for the maximum funding available via the 2019/20 Men’s Shed Funding Program to contribute to renovations. 12.Car Share Services - Extension of LicenceTransport Planner: Vaughn Allan Manager Transport & Parking: Ian McLauchlanActing General Manager Assets and Services: Rick KwasekPurposeTo seek approval to extend the licence of Hertz Australia (trading as Flexicar) for a period of 12 months to allow a review of the operation of car sharing in the municipality and re-tendering of the serviceBackgroundCar Share is a service that provides cars for hire located throughout the city, through either on-street or off-street locations. Car Share differs from traditional car rental services in that the cars are accessed through an app or swipe card and are generally located in more densely populated activity areas and within walking distance of where members live. The cars are hired per hour, rather than per day, to allow people who do not own a car to undertake occasional trips that require a vehicle. Current industry-conducted research suggests that each car share vehicle replaces up to 9 private vehicles in the surrounding area the car share vehicle is located. Providing car share services in a municipality offers residents with a viable option to forego their primary or secondary car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the financial costs of owning and running a vehicle.At its meeting, 17 November 2014 Council considered a report on car sharing and adopted the Stonnington Car Share Policy (Attachment 1). Council then resolved to commence a tender process for the operation of car share services at selected car park sites in the Chapel Street Activity Centre.A further report was submitted to Council on 7 March, 2016 (Attachment 2) reporting on the tender evaluation. The intention of the tender was that,“The Contract shall be in force for a period of three (3) years commencing from the date of execution of this Contract. Further extensions of one (1) year plus one (1) year may be available at the sole discretion of the Principal.” An initial licence was entered into for a 3 year period which expires on 16th April 2019. The intention is to enact the initial one year extension.DiscussionCurrent Operation of FlexicarFlexicar currently operates car share spaces at:Cato Street Car park [off-street] (now Grattan St x Greville St) x2Princes Close Car park [off-street] [PET] x2Barry Street [on-street]Darling Street Car park [off-street] x2Surrey Road North Car Park [off-street]Caroline Street South Car Park [off-street]James Street [off-street]Windsor Station Car park [off-street] x2The Cato Street spaces were transferred to Grattan Street as part of the Cato Square development and will be re-established in the new Cato Square as part of the car park operation.Under the terms of the Licence, the operator was required to provide reports on:Membership Data ?Monthly membership numbers and percentage growth relative to previous month and same time last year; ?Split of private/residential members and business members;?Geographical location of members within Stonnington?Member Complaints?Summary of Known Parking Infringements Issued to MembersVehicle Data?Hours booked per month per vehicle (total/weekday/weekend);?Number of trips (total/weekday/weekend);?Distance travelled by vehicle (total/weekday/weekend);?Distribution of trip distances (total/weekday/weekend);?Utilisation rate per month (no of hours booked per month / time available per month)Annual Survey The Service Provider will conduct an annual membership survey with a focus on car ownership levels and travel habits (e.g. purpose of trip; average vehicle occupancy; distance travelled etc.). Council provided input into the final survey questionnaire. Reporting on 2018 results was provided by Flexicar which indicate: ?The majority of car share members are located in the Prahran, Windsor and South Yarra areas as expected (256 out of 333 Flexicar car share members in 2018)?Just over 25% of Flexicar accounts in Stonnington are business accounts?Minimal difficulties have been experienced with parking infringements by the operator during the initial term?South Yarra is the 8th most popular suburb in Australia for Flexicar bookings?The average utilisation rate (the percentage of time a car is booked out over a 24-hour period)for each of the sites in 2018 is listed below:StreetYearly Site AverageCato Street Car park [OS] (now Grattan St x Greville St) x222.97%Princes Close Car park [OS] [PET] x221.86%Barry Street21.42%Darling Street Car park [OS] x225.59%Surrey Road North Car Park [OS]20.39%Caroline Street South Car Park [OS]16.26%James Street [OS]25.66%Windsor Station Car park [OS] x222.85%Flexicar has advised that the Cato Street and Darling Street sites are among the higher performing sites in Australia. Council officers have requested further data to contextualise Flexicar’s performance in Stonnington, relative to other local governments in Greater Melbourne.A customer satisfaction survey for all Flexicar members has been conducted and does not indicate any major issues from members generally, although Stonnington members’ comments are not separately identified.The existing Flexicar membership survey provides a high-level overview of the company’s performance across Australia. Council officers have requested more granular analysis be provided at a municipal level in the future, to better understand car share operator performance in Stonnington.Current Issues with Car Sharing model adoptedWhilst in accordance with the car share policy, Council’s current model of car share operation (assigning car share sites in activity centre to the one operator) has led to satisfactory operating performance by the selected operator it has however resulted in intrusion into the residential street by other operators.Specifically, Councillors may be aware of resident complaints of other operators parking their vehicles in unrestricted parking areas in residential streets, seeking to establish a market in Stonnington. It is suggested Council should re-evaluate the provision of car share sites with the aim of re-tendering the service. To enable this to occur it is suggested that in the interim the current licence be extended for a further 12 months in line with the terms of the contract. This extension will allow council to re-evaluate how best to distribute car share services across the municipality. Once a better understanding of the issues and constraints are understood a further report will be drafted for council consideration outlining the terms of car share use over the subsequent tender period.Council officers have been in on-going discussions with Flexicar who are aware and supportive of the possibility of the proposed 12-month contract extension. Policy ImplicationsProviding car share services in Stonnington is consistent with Council’s sustainable transport policy and objectives. Car share services provide a legitimate alternative to vehicle ownership, encouraging more trips to be made by walking, cycling, and public transport. Providing car share services has been shown to reduce vehicle ownership, easing local congestion and parking, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the financial costs of owning a car for consumers.Financial and Resources ImplicationsFlexicar has paid all invoices forwarded to date. The revenues provided to Council are minor ($2,221.80 for August 2017- August 2018). Legal advice & implicationsThe current Car Share Services Licence expires 15th April 2019. Council would extend the Licence by agreement under the same terms and conditions for a further 12 months in line with the contract conditions. The initial contract agreement provides the ability for Council to extend the contract for two separate 12-month extensions at Council’s discretion. This proposed extension is the first of the possible two extensions under the licence agreement.ConclusionThe current licence arrangement Fleixcar to operate car share spaces in activity centres in Stonnington has been performing well but is due to expire on the 16th April 2019It is suggested the licence extension be offered to Flexicar for a further 12 months under the same terms and conditions.During the next 12 months the provision of car share sites in activity centres will be reviewed and a further report be submitted to Council on a suitable tender process for the market to consider.Human Rights ConsiderationThis recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Attachments1.Car Share Policy - Attachment 1Excluded2.Tender Evaluation Report - Attachment 2Excluded RecommendationThat:1. The contract with Flexicar to operate car share sites in activity centres in Stonnington be extended for a further 12 month period.2.A further report be submitted to Council on the provision of car share sites in Stonnington. 13.Use of Council Venue for Public MeetingManager Governance & Corporate Support: Fabienne Thewlis General Manager Corporate Services: Geoff Cockram PurposeThe purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the use of Malvern Town Hall Main Hall for a public meeting in respect to the Toorak Road Rail Crossing removal.BackgroundCouncil at its meeting held on 18 March 2019 resolved (in part):“Item 5 -Toorak Road Level Crossing Removal ProjectMotion:Moved Cr Matthew KoceSeconded Cr Sally Davis That Council:h)In the interests of community consultation and engagement, Council requests and encourages the LXRP and State representatives to facilitate a community workshop/briefing meeting with all affected stakeholders. (Council advises that it is agreeable to making its public facilities available for such a meeting)”The Hon. Michael O’Brien MP Member for Malvern and Leader of the Opposition has made a formal application to use the Malvern Town Hall for a community meeting to commence at 7.00pm on Wednesday 24 April 2019. Full details of any attendees are not provided this time such as representatives from LXRA or State Government.DiscussionWhile no formal request for waiver of the Hall Hire fee has been received the application assumes that no fee would be charged. A further question was raised about the timing of the meeting being 24 April 2019, and whether this would be suitable to attract the number of people they are proposing – 350. School holidays will have finished but being the week immediately after Easter and before Anzac Day many might take advantage of this shorter week for a break. This was followed up with the applicant’s office and they did not consider it an issue.Policy ImplicationsGenerally such an application would be considered under the Community Grants process as such it must be determined whether the request would be eligible. Given that the event will provide an opportunity for more community involvement in the Toorak Road LXRA project it can be argued that the proposed meeting is eligible for support under the Community Grants process. Financial and Resources ImplicationsThe waiver of the hall hire fee can be accommodated within the existing Council budget. The cost for the hire of the hall is $2041.00 and for the estimated number of people then four security guards could be required at a cost of $616.00ConclusionThe Hon. Michael O’Brien MP Member for Malvern and Leader of the Opposition has made a formal application to use the Malvern Town Hall for a community meeting to commence at 7.00pm on Wednesday 24 April 2019, regarding the Toorak Road Level Crossing removal project. The application assumes that Council will waive the usual costs associated with operation of the facility and supporting the event.Having regard to the Council resolution of 18 March 2019 (above) it is proposed to support the event by waiving the usual fees.Human Rights ConsiderationThis report has given consideration to the obligations of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 in forming this recommendation. RecommendationThat further to the Council resolution of 18 March 2109, requesting and encouraging the LXRP and State representatives to facilitate a community workshop/briefing meeting with all affected stakeholders in the interests of community consultation and engagement, Council:a)make the Malvern Town Hall available for a community workshop/briefing regarding the Toorak Road Rail Crossing removal to be convened as requested through the office of the local State Member for Malvern on Wednesday 24 April 2019, to commence at 7.00pm; andb)waive the usual costs associated with operation of the facility and supporting the event. ................
................

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

Google Online Preview   Download