P L A N N I N G C O M M I T T E E R E P O R T Agenda Item 5.4 2 February 2010APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT: TP-2009-545, 79-89 LEVESON STREET, NORTH MELBOURNE

Division City Planning and Infrastructure

Presenter Martin Williams, Executive Officer Planning

Purpose

1. To advise the Planning Committee of a Planning Permit Application to demolish the existing building and construct a four storey residential development comprising 21 dwellings, with basement bicycle and car parking and a partial waiver of the car parking requirements.

2. This application is presented to the Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Clarke.

Summary

Application Number: TP-2009-545

Proposal: To demolish the existing building and construct a four storey residential development comprising 21 dwellings, with basement bicycle and car parking and a partial waiver of the car parking requirements.

Applicant: City Prestige Development Pty Ltd

Zoning: Mixed Use Zone

Overlay: Heritage Overlay – Schedule 3 (North and West Melbourne Precinct) Design and Development Overlay – Schedule 32 (North Melbourne Peripheral)

Existing Use: Single storey warehouse

Number of Objections: 31

Recommendation from management

3. That the Planning Committee determine to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit subject to the conditions at Attachment 1 of this report.

Background

4. An application (TP-2001-681) for a three storey building was approved by consent at VCAT on 22 July 2003. This permit was not acted upon and has since lapsed.

Page 1 of 23

2

5. Application TP-2007-1022 was lodged in 2007 by The Ellis Group Pty Ltd on behalf of City Prestige Developments. The application was not supported but was put on hold at the request of the applicant. This application was formally amended by Contour Consultants on behalf of City Prestige Developments. The amended drawings (which were the same as those currently being considered under the current application) were advertised however the application was withdrawn and the current application lodged.

Site and Surrounds

6. The subject site is located approximately 300m north east of the Errol Street activity centre. It is on the west side of Leveson Street at its junction with the south side of Bendigo Street. It contains a single storey warehouse building.

7. The site is roughly square in shape with an eastern abuttal to Leveson Street of 25.9m and a northern abuttal to Bendigo Street of 26m. The western boundary of the site abuts Cooks Lane for a length of 18m (Cooks Lane is 3.2m wide) beyond which is the private open space of the residential property at 11-13 Bendigo Street. There is an existing crossover to Leveson Street (3.4m wide).

8. Leveson Street contains a mixture of warehouse/industrial sites and residential properties. Generally the scale of the warehouse/industrial buildings is larger than the scale of residential properties. Bendigo Street contains a mix of buildings of various heights with a large residential building on the adjacent corner to the subject site. The land rises considerably towards Errol Street (See attachment 2 – Location Plan).

Proposal

9. The application proposes the demolition of the existing building and the construction of a building containing 21 dwellings.

10. Car and bicycle parking is proposed at basement and ground levels (16 at basement and 4 at ground). The basement will be accessed via a new crossover to Bendigo Street and the existing Leveson Street crossover is to be removed.

11. The proposal includes eight, one bedroom dwellings and 13, two bedroom dwellings. Each dwelling contains a living and meals area, bathroom and balcony.

12. The building is finished in high shine red, blue and white bricks. The bricks are arranged in a distinctive pattern along both frontages. Along Bendigo Street the bricks are arranged to make a large ‘X’ (see Attachment 3 – Proposed Plans).

13. The application was not formally amended but the applicant provided marked up concept plans that respond to comments provided by the objectors as well as Council’s urban designer, traffic engineer, heritage advisor and town planner. The amendments proposed in the concept plans are listed in condition 1 of the proposed conditions (see Attachment 1 – Conditions).

Planning Controls

14. The subject site is located within the Mixed Use Zone. A planning permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot within the zone. The purpose of the zone is:

‘To provide for a range of residential, commercial, industrial and other uses which complement the mixed use function of the locality.

To encourage residential development that respects the neighbourhood character.’

Page 2 of 23

3

15. The subject site is located within the Heritage Overlay - Schedule 3 which applies to the North and West Melbourne Precinct. A permit is required to demolish, construct a building and carry out works within this overlay. The purposes of the overlay includes:

‘To conserve and enhance those elements which contribute to the significance of a heritage places; and

To ensure that development does not adversely affect the significance of heritage places.’

16. The Heritage Overlay provides decision guidelines that the Responsible Authority must consider before deciding on a permit application.

17. The subject site is located within the Design and Development Overlay – Schedule 32. The overlay identifies a mandatory maximum building height of 14m and includes built form objectives to be considered when determining an appropriate building height for the subject site.

Referrals

18. There are no relevant external referral authorities. The application was internally referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor, Urban Design and Engineering Services Branches.

19. Council’s Heritage Advisor made the following comments (summarised):

“Demolition is appropriate and supported;

A reduction in height is recommended to respond to the scale of the existing development in Leveson Street and the smaller scale in Bendigo Street. A maximum height of 10.96m (RL32.30) at the Bendigo/Leveson corner should apply to the site, with further reductions in scale adjoining 1 Bendigo Street and to the west and south consistent with the previous permit.

If the car park were to be fully set below ground, the overall height would be substantially reduced and closer to an appropriate level;

The above ground car park creates poor pedestrian amenity;

The car park access from Bendigo Street is supported;

The strips of red, black and white bricks further emphasise the horizontal form and again exacerbate the perception of excessive bulk. An approach which divides the new building into visually independent but connected components around 5-7m in width is the preferred approach. This would better reflect the contributory components in the heritage place;

The ‘X’ adds to the impression of substantial scale;

The use of the strident red, white and black brickwork would draw attention to the proposed building and is not supported;

A solid material balustrade is preferred on the third floor; and

Clear glass is preferred over light grey glass.”

Page 3 of 23

4

20. Council’s Urban Designer made the following comments (summarised):

“The overall building height does not exceed that specified by the Melbourne Planning Scheme;

Greater detail is considered for the façade at pedestrian level in both streets;

The principal pedestrian entrance in Leveson Street is lowered to be at or closer to street level with universal accessibility offered in Leveson and Bendigo Streets (with a preference for the former). Lowering the entrance could be achieved by shifting it southwards and so more strategically utilising the existing topography; and

The fire and exit garage door (material and design is to be more keeping in character of the neighbouring brick buildings.”

21. Council’s Engineering Services Branch made the following comments (summarised):

“The provision of car parking is adequate;

It is noted that the new crossover to Bendigo Street is expected to remove one on street car parking space which will be replaced by the on street space which will be replaced on Leveson Street due to the removal of the crossover;

The applicant should not depend on street parking too much as residents may be excluded from receiving street parking permits.

Traffix report indicates that the car park has been generally designed in accordance with the requirements of Australian Standards and Clause 52.06 of the Planning Scheme;

The provision of 12 bicycle spaces in the basement car park will accommodate bicycle parking in excess of the demand generated by the residents.

A waste storage area is provided within the basement level car park, however no storage areas are provided within each of the residential levels. The Traffix Group report indicates that waste removal is expected to be undertaken by Council services or a private contractor and recommends that a Waste Management Plan be developed for the site as a condition of the permit. Engineering Services agrees with this recommendation. Ultimately, the storage and collection of refuse is to be to the satisfaction of the Principal Engineer – Services. A Waste Management Plan will be required via permit condition; and

ESG recommended standard conditions and amendments via condition.”

Key Issues

22. The key planning issues are heritage (demolition and built form), building height, potential amenity impacts, impact upon parking and traffic.

Heritage - Demolition

23. The application proposes the demolition of an ungraded building within a heritage overlay.

24. Given the minimal contribution the existing building makes to the street and the fact that it is not of heritage significance Council’s heritage advisor supported the demolition. The demolition of the building is therefore considered acceptable.

Page 4 of 23

5

Heritage – Built Form

25. Council’s planning policy, Heritage Places Outside the Capital City Zone (Clause 22.05) identifies the subject site as ungraded within Level three streetscapes (Bendigo and Leveson Streets). The adjoining dwellings are mostly ungraded, with the exception of the western adjoining property at 1 Bendigo Street which is D graded and 11-13 Bendigo Street which is C graded. The heritage policy describes a level 3 streetscape as follows:

“Level three streetscapes may contain significant buildings but they will be from diverse periods and styles and of low individual significance or integrity.”

26. Council’s heritage policy requires that the shape, façade pattern, colours and details of a new building be interpretive. Interpretive is defined by the policy as:

“a looser reference to historic size, form, proportions, colours, detailing and decoration, but still requires use of historic or closely equivalent materials.”

27. The policy requires that surface materials be respectful. Respectful is defined as:

“a design approach in which historic building size, form, proportions, colours and materials are adopted but modern interpretations are used instead of copies of historic detailing and decorative work.”

28. It is considered that the height, scale and form of the proposed building is acceptable for a Level three streetscape. The form, façade pattern and details are interpretive and appropriately respond to the requirements of the policy. The surface materials are required to be respectful. A permit condition will require a toned down version of the current colour scheme that uses matt bricks as opposed to patent shiny bricks. This will lessen the overall impact of the building and allow it to sit comfortably within the streetscape.

Building Height

29. The site falls with the Design and Development Overlay – Schedule 32 which sets out a maximum building height of 14m. The proposal complies with this maximum, but a permit condition will require the building to be reduced to 13.6m to provide for a higher level of pedestrian amenity. The design objectives of DDO32 set out the following relevant built form outcomes:

29.1. new development respects existing built form especially low scale of the existing older building stock in the street; and

29.2. development in streets with higher typical built form provides a transition in scale to the lower building forms.

30. The surrounding area comprises buildings of varying heights, from single storey office buildings to four storey residential properties. In maintaining the 14m height limit, the development will have a height which corresponds with surrounding development, with some buildings being taller and some lower than the proposal. The proposed development will not interrupt views of significant landmarks due to its location of the subject site and topography. Council’s Urban Designer supported the proposed building height, design and form.

31. Some objectors have raised a VCAT decision for the site from 2003 (Planning application No. TP-2001-681) suggesting that this imposed a maximum height of 10.96m and that the current application should be made to abide by this height restriction. This is not correct. The height of the proposed building in that case was indeed 10.96m, however, this was neither a permit condition nor a requirement imposed by VCAT. This was simply the height that was applied for in the original planning permit application.

Page 5 of 23

6

32. In the 2003 order VCAT makes no reference to the height of the building or to any height restriction that should be applied. There was a requirement that the south-west corner of the building be stepped back by 4m (from the south and west boundaries) at both second and third floor levels. The current proposal achieves greater building setbacks than were required in the 2003 case.

33. Importantly, the Planning Scheme (Design and Development Overlay) specifies an appropriate height of 14m in this location. The proposed building meets the requirements of the overlay, causes negligible off site amenity impacts and sits on a prominent corner location. Furthermore the proposed permit conditions include increased setbacks of the upper levels and a reduction of building height to 13.6m. These changes assist in reducing the perceived bulk of the building and ensure it achieves an appropriate degree of fit within the streetscape context.

Potential Amenity Impacts

34. The extent of overshadowing caused by the proposed development is very minor. Some shadow falls upon the southern adjoining property at 77 Leveson Street, North Melbourne. The area where the shadow falls is covered by a colour bond roof and used for car parking so the impact of the shadow is negligible. A small amount of shadow falls upon the rear of 11-13 Bendigo Street at 9am but by 12pm the property is unaffected. Given the minimal amount of shadowing and the short duration for which it is cast upon 11-13 Bendigo St, the shadowing is considered acceptable. The shadowing meets the requirements of the planning scheme (see Attachment 4 – Shadow Diagrams).

35. The upper level windows and balconies have been adequately screened or setback in accordance with the planning scheme to address overlooking concerns.

36. The proposal generally complies with the Design Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development.

Car Parking and Traffic Impacts

37. The development proposes 13, two bedroom units and eight, one bedroom units with 20 car parking spaces and 12 bicycle spaces. The planning scheme requires a car parking provision of two spaces per dwelling (42 spaces required in total). The application proposes a waiver of 22 car parking spaces.

38. Engineering Services found the provision of car parking at a rate of one per dwelling to be adequate based on the availability of public transport and facilities (public transport, shops, schools, employment opportunities, etc) to accommodate a car free lifestyle.

39. Should a permit issue a note will be included advising that future owners and occupiers of the units will not have access to Council’s Priority Parking Scheme to minimise the impact on on-street car parking spaces. The proposal does not result in the loss of any on street car parking. The loss of a car parking space on Bendigo Street due to the creation of the crossover is off set by the removal of the existing crossover to Leveson Street and the addition of an on street space.

40. The subject site is located within the policy area covered by Amendment C133 which seeks to apply maximum car parking rates. Under this policy no car parking waiver would be required.

41. It is considered that the proposal is an appropriate resolution in this location. On this basis it is considered that the proposal is worthy of Council’s support and that a Notice of Decision should issue subject to the conditions as listed in Attachment 1.

Page 6 of 23

7

Consultation

42. On 31 August 2009, notice of the application was sent to the owners/occupiers of the surrounding properties and public notices were placed on site for a period of fourteen days.

43. In response 31 objections were received from owners and occupiers of neighbouring properties. The grounds of objection are generally summarised as follows:

43.1. overdevelopment of the site scale, sitting, massing, bulk and inadequate setbacks;

43.2. inconsistency with previous VCAT decision, the building height (should not exceed 10.96);

43.3. loss of amenity through overshadowing and overlooking;

43.4. lack of on site car parking and impacts upon traffic flow;

43.5. lack of environmental sustainability features;

43.6. inadequate waste management facilities;

43.7. construction noise disturbance;

43.8. inappropriate transition to 1 Bendigo Street;

43.9. lack of articulation at the intersection of Bendigo and Leveson Streets; and

43.10. the process which this application undertook was particularly confusing.

Timeframe

44. The application has exceeded the 60 day time limit set out in the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (“the Act”).

Relation to Council policy (including Municipal Strategic Statement)

45. The recommendation is consistent with the following Council policies:

46. Clause 16 relates to housing, Clause 16.02 Medium Density Housing has the following objectives:

“To encourage the development of well designed medium density housing which:

• Respects neighbourhood character;

• Improves housing choice;

• makes better use of existing infrastructure; and

• improves energy efficiency of housing.”

Page 7 of 23

Attachments: 1. Conditions 2. Locality Plan 3. Application plans 4. Shadow Diagrams

8

47. Clause 22.05 – Heritage Places Outside the Capital City Zone has the following objective:

“To ensure that new development, and the construction or external alteration of buildings, make a positive contribution to the built form and amenity of the area and are respectful to the architectural, social or historic character and appearance of the streetscape and the area.”

48. Clause 22.17 relates to Urban Design Outside the Capital City Zone and has the following objective:

“To ensure that the scale, sitting, massing and bulk of development complement the scale, sitting, massing and bulk of adjoining and nearby built form.”

“To ensure that buildings on prominent sites are designed to achieve a high standard of design which reflects the importance of their location and extent of their visibility.”

49. The following is policy:

“The height of new development should respect the existing built form of the immediate surroundings. In areas where the desire for built form change has been identified, the height of new development is encouraged to respond to the height of the emerging preferred new built form character.”

“Development is encouraged to give prominence to the principal street entrance and frontage of a building.”

Finance

50. There are no direct financial issues arising from the recommendations contained in this report.

Conflict of interest

51. No member of Council staff, or other person engaged under a contract, involved in advising on or preparing this report has declared a direct or indirect interest in relation to the matter of the report.

Legal

52. Division 1 of Part 4 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 sets out the requirements in relation to applications for permits pursuant to the relevant planning scheme

Sustainability

53. Sustainability requirements for all new dwellings are contained within the Building Code of Australia and will apply to this development through the building permit process.

Page 8 of 23

Attachment 1 Agenda Item 5.4

Planning Committee 2 February 2010

1

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS TP-2009-545

79-89 LEVESON STREET, NORTH MELBOURNE 1. Prior to the commencement of any demolition on the land, the applicant must submit

to the Responsible Authority three copies of plans drawn to scale generally in accordance with the plans received on 15/07/2009 by Carabott Holt Architects but amended to show:

a. The deletion of one car parking space from the basement; b. The deletion of the basement studio for dwelling G2; c. The ground floor of the North West corner of apt G2 lowered 1m to RL23.18; d. The bin store relocated to the north west corner of the basement; e. The entry door at street level and stairs recessed into the building; f. The deletion of the sub basement windows to dwelling G2 on the north and

east frontage; g. The building setback of the third floor increased to 3000mm; h. The roof setback increased to 3100mm; i. The east facing balcony enclosed by the glass balustrade on the third level

deleted whilst retaining the north west corner balcony to Apartment 3.2 and setting back the east facing balcony of Apartment 3.3 a minimum of 3100mm from title boundary.

j. An increase in the extent of red brick, replacement of the blue gloss bricks with a matt dark grey/blue brick; replacement of the white highlight bricks with cream and replacement of the black brick with matt grey or blue;

k. Reduction of the floor levels by 100mm (reducing the overall height to 13600mm);

l. Replacement of the white steel plate balustrades with light grey; m. A glass entry door at street level; n. Reduction of the projection of the ‘X’ feature to 20mm; o. Replacement of the grey glass with clear p. The width of car parking spaces 13 and 14 increased to a minimum 2.8m. q. Appropriate pedestrian sight lines in accordance with Figure 3.2 & 3.3 of

Section 3.2.4 of AS/NZS 2890.1-2004. r. Head clearance of at least 2.2m must be provided in accordance with

AS/NZS 2890.1-2004. s. Access to the garage door for users of space 1 so that they can manoeuvre on

site and exit in a forward direction. These amended plans must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and when approved shall be the endorsed plans of this permit.

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

3. Prior to the commencement of the development a Waste Management Plan must be developed for the site. The plan must be to the satisfaction of the Principal Engineer – Services.

4. All projections over the street alignment must conform to Building Regulations 2006, Part 5, Sections 505 to 514 as appropriate and Council’s Road Encroachment Guidelines.

Page 9 of 23

2

5. Any projection over a street alignment should be drained to a legal point of discharge in accordance with plans and specifications first approved by the Responsible Authority – Manager Engineering Services.

6. A legally binding agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 should be entered into between the land Owner(s) and the Council regarding; the projection over Leveson Street more than 300mm over the street alignment The Agreement is to indemnify Council against any claims arising from the existence of the projection. The Agreement should require the Owner to maintain and keep in good repair the projection at its cost and to the satisfaction of Council whether or not the need for maintenance or repair of the structures arose from the act, neglect or default of the Owner. The Agreement should refute any future adverse possession claims over the space occupied by the projection. The Agreement should be to the satisfaction of Manager – Engineering Services; Manager – Planning and Building; and Council’s Manager – Governance Services. The Owner must pay all of Council’s reasonable legal costs and expenses of this Agreement, including Land Titles Registration fees.

7. All pedestrian ramps should be designed and constructed in accordance with AS 1428 Design for access and mobility and should be fitted with ground surface tactile indicators TGSI’s. Steps should be set back sufficiently to enable all necessary tactile ground surface indicators to be installed within the property curtilage The design of TGSI’s should be approved by Engineering Services Group prior to installation contact Hok Sie on telephone 9658 8584.

8. The owner of the subject land should construct a drainage system, incorporating water sensitive urban design, within the development and make provision to connect this system to Council’s stormwater drainage system in accordance with plans and specifications first approved by the Responsible Authority; Manager - Engineering Services.

9. The Owner of the subject land should construct all necessary vehicle crossings and demolish all unnecessary vehicle crossings adjacent the subject land in accordance with plans and specifications first approved by the Responsible Authority; Manager - Engineering Services.

10. The Owner of the subject land will not be permitted to alter the existing footpath/road levels in Leveson and Bendigo Streets for the purpose of constructing new vehicle or pedestrian entrances without first obtaining the written approval of the Responsible Authority; Manager - Engineering Services.

11. All necessary approvals and permits are to be first obtained from Council and the works performed to the satisfaction of Manager - Engineering Services.

12. Prior to the commencement of the development (or the certification or issue of a

statement of compliance under the Subdivision Act 1988) the applicant must provide:

(a) A Certificate of Environmental Audit in accordance with Section 53Y of the Environment Protection Act 1970; or (b) A Statement of Environmental Audit under Section 53Z of the Environment Protection Act 1970. A Statement must state that the site is suitable for the use and development allowed by this permit.

Where a Statement of Environmental Audit is provided, all the conditions of the Statement of Environmental Audit must be complied with to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, prior to commencement of use of the site. Written confirmation of compliance must be provided by a suitably qualified environmental

Page 10 of 23

3

professional or other suitable person acceptable to the responsible authority. In addition, sign off must be in accordance with any requirements in the Statement conditions regarding verification of works. If there are conditions on a Statement of Environmental Audit that the responsible authority considers require significant ongoing maintenance and/or monitoring, the applicant must enter into a Section 173 Agreement under the Planning and Environment Act 1987. The Agreement must be executed on title prior to the commencement of the use and prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance under the Subdivision Act 1987. The applicant must meet all costs associated with drafting and execution of the Agreement, including those incurred by the responsible authority

13. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: • the development is not started within two years of the date of this permit. • the development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit. The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.

Notes:

A note should be included on the planning permit for this development, stating 'The permit applicant is advised that owners and occupiers of this development will not be eligible for inclusion in the resident parking scheme and will therefore not receive resident parking permits'.

Page 11 of 23

Attachment 2 Agenda Item 5.4

Planning Committee 2 February 2010

1

Locality Plan

Subject Site

Page 12 of 23

1

PRO

POSE

D P

LA

NS

(BA

SEM

EN

T)

Atta

chm

ent 3

A

gend

a Ite

m 5

.4

Plan

ning

Com

mitt

ee

2 Fe

brua

ry 2

010 Page 13 of 23

2

PRO

POSE

D P

LA

NS

(GR

OU

ND

FL

OO

R)

Page 14 of 23

3

PRO

POSE

D P

LA

NS

(FIR

ST F

LO

OR

)

Page 15 of 23

4

PRO

POSE

D P

LA

NS

(SE

CO

ND

FL

OO

R)

Page 16 of 23

5

PRO

POSE

D P

LA

NS

(TH

IRD

FL

OO

R)

Page 17 of 23

6

PRO

POSE

D P

LA

NS

(NO

RT

H A

ND

EA

ST E

LE

VA

TIO

NS)

Page 18 of 23

7

PRO

POSE

D P

LA

NS

(EA

ST A

ND

WE

ST E

LE

VA

TIO

NS)

Page 19 of 23

8

PRO

POSE

D P

LA

NS

(ST

RE

ET

SCA

PE E

LE

VA

TIO

NS)

Page 20 of 23

1

SHA

DO

W D

IAG

RA

MS

Atta

chm

ent 4

A

gend

a Ite

m 5

.4

Plan

ning

Com

mitt

ee

2 Fe

brua

ry 2

010

Page 21 of 23

Agenda Item 5.4 Planning Committee

2 February 2010

FINANCE ATTACHMENT

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT: TP-2009-545, 79-89 LEVESON STREET, NORTH MELBOURNE

There are no direct financial issues arising from the recommendations contained in this report.

Phu Nguyen Acting Manager Financial Services

Page 22 of 23

Agenda Item 5.4 Planning Committee

2 February 2010

LEGAL ATTACHMENT

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT: TP-2009-545, 79-89 LEVESON STREET, NORTH MELBOURNE

Division 1 of Part 4 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (‘the Act’) sets out the requirements in relation to applications for permits pursuant to the relevant planning scheme.

Section 61(1) of the Act provides that the Responsible Authority may decide:

“(a) to grant a permit;

(b) to grant a permit subject to conditions; or

(c) to refuse to grant a permit on any ground it thinks fit.”

In making its decision, section 60(1)(c) of the Act requires the Responsible Authority to consider, amongst other things, all objections and other submissions which it has received.

Section 79 of the Act provides that if the Responsible Authority fails to grant a permit within the prescribed time an applicant may appeal to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. If the applicant does so appeal, section 84 of the Act provides that the Responsible Authority may decide on an application at any time after an appeal has been lodged; however the Responsible Authority must not issue or give a permit, a notice of decision or a notice of refusal after the appeal has been lodged.

Kim Wood Manager Legal Services

Page 23 of 23