application for review p295/2012

application for review p260/2014 1 Monckton Road, Templestowe

1


2

table of contents

cover page .................................................................................................................................... 3

introduction .................................................................................................................................. 4

the site and context ..................................................................................................................... 5

planning & design framework ..................................................................................................... 8

the proposal ................................................................................................................................. 9

urban design assessment ......................................................................................................... 10

table of figures

figure 1 – site identification figure 2 – place values

appendices

appendix a – curriculum vitae: craig czarny

appendix b – relevant state and local policies


3

cover page

the file number given by the Tribunal for the relevant proceeding;

VCAT Reference No. P260/2014

the date of the report;

31 July 2014

the date of site visit and inspection;

2 July 2014

if the report relates to a property, the address of that property and the date(s) of any inspection;

1 Monckton Road, Templestowe

the party for whom the report has been prepared;

Tony Zoobi – 68 Websters Road, Templestowe

the person from whom you received your instructions

Nick Crawford: TP Legal

Figure 1: subject site identification


4

introduction

1. My name is Craig Czarny and I am director of design at Hansen Partnership. I have over 25 years’

experience in urban design projects in Australia and overseas. I hold a Bachelor Degree in Urban Planning

and a Masters Degree in Landscape Architecture and have provided specialist urban design, streetscape,

landscape and public domain advice on a number of development projects of varying scales. I have a sound

appreciation of the urban form, streetscape and public domain issues in the City of Manningham, having

provided advice both for Council and private clients on a number of activity centre, residential and

neighbourhood character precincts within the municipality.

2. Projects that I have managed have received state and national awards from the Planning Institute of

Australia (PIA) and Australian Institute of Landscape Architects (AILA). I have also served as a sessional

lecturer at Melbourne University in urban design, a sessional member at Planning Panels Victoria and a

judge of local and international design projects. My experience is set out in Appendix A

3. On this occasion, I have been engaged by an Objector (Party to the Review) Mr Tony Zoobi of 68 Websters

Road to comment on the urban design and landscape attributes of a proposed development at 1 Monckton

Road, Templestowe. The proposal is subject to Application for Review P260/2014 against Council’s Notice of

Refusal to Grant a Permit for Planning Application PL13/023501.

4. I have inspected the subject site and its surrounds most recently on 2nd July 2014 and reviewed the original

architectural drawings by Chalke Architects, dated April 2013 and subsequent amended plans prepared by

the newly engaged Blair Architects dated May 2014. I have also reviewed the Council Officer’s report,

relevant Council policies and other background material.

5. In summary, I believe that the proposed development exceeds a reasonable built form expectation within an

important transitional landscape location, and the Low Density Residential Zone. The courtyard planning of

the form effectively pushes its profile outwards toward sensitive residential interfaces to the north and west

and the solid 2 storey presentation with broad roof form results in a singular overwhelming mass in the

setting. The proposed building mass is perched at a topographic high point and will have a dominating effect

from the courtyard and living areas of 68 Websters Road. The proposal will also be dominating on approach

up the sloping profile of Websters Road from the west, where notable existing pine rows are removed in

place of access ways. Furthermore, the arrangement of access and parking within the front setback to

Monckton Road compromises the ability to instate a strong and integrated landscape regime.


5

View to one of the bungalows within the subject site

View toward the neighbouring dwelling to the north

Neo-Georgian dwelling to the east across Monckton Road

the site and context

6. The site is located at 1 Monckton Road Templestowe, comprising a large allotment formerly part of a broader

orchard landholding. The existing heritage dwelling ‘Caringa’ is sited near to the corner of Websters and

Monckton Road with its primary elevation oriented to the Monckton Road alignment with complementary

period fencing and prominent hedge. A series of outbuildings are scattered around the site including a large

sorting facility associated within the original function of the site, and now used for storage. The site is loosely

ordered into 3 zones, including an inner dwelling / garden zone, the sorting facility and open lawn area to the

north / north-west, and the densely vegetated zone incorporating the dam in the north-west corner.

7. The site (refer Figure 1) has the following interfaces:

▪ To the north of the subject site is a 1980s colonial-

homestead style dwelling with broad single storey

wings and a central consolidated 2 storey

component. A tennis court is located to the rear

(west) with a pool framed by the wings of the single

storey form. The site is located downslope from the

subject site, with a garage on-boundary sunk more

than a metre lower than the fence line. A row of

feature deciduous trees are located within the road

reserve which form part of the landscape frontage

treatment. Fencing is open profile comprising a tall

white timber picket of approximately 1.8m high.

▪ To the east of the site across Monckton Road is a

large neo-Georgian dwelling, with a compact two

storey plan and flanking single level garages to

either side. A broad portico entry with pediment

projects forward of the primary building mass, and

connects to a circular driveway. A pool area is

positioned in the north-east corner, but otherwise no

landscape treatment or planting is noted. Fencing is

open profile palisade style with steel spears.


6

dwelling to the west

smaller allotments to the south across Websters Road

▪ To the west is a homestead style single storey

dwelling with incorporating parking to the west and

an indoor pool perpendicular to the contours. The

dwelling is benched into the topography along the

east boundary at the highest point of the site to

benefit from views downslope to the west. The

property incorporates a sheltered landscaped

courtyard off the living areas to the east, as well as

a tennis court and open area to the west with a

formal landscape regime.

▪ To the south across Websters Road are a pair of

recently developed brick veneer dwellings, on

allotments more typical in proportion to a suburban

parcel within the GRZ3 further to the south across

Warrandyte Road. Both dwellings orient their frontage to Newmans Road, with primary outdoor spaces

to the west. Monckton Road becomes Newmans Road at the intersection with Websters Road and

extends some 650m to the south-west where it joins Warrandyte Road (the nearest Category 1 Road

Zone), which flanks the southern edge of the broader Yarra River Valley. A retirement village is located

at the corner of Newmans Road and Warrandyte Road, benefiting from a main road frontage.

8. In the broader context, the site is located in an established low density precinct which provides an important

threshold between the suburban residential land to the south of Warrandyte Road and the RCZ1 and Open

Space corridor of the Yarra River within the PCRZ. Between Bulleen and Templestowe, the edge condition

morphs from a single skin of private land, to a more gradual gradation proximate to the subject site. Larger

institutional or other non-residential uses typically cluster along main road corridors, whilst the low density

hinterland is predominantly residential with occasional associated agricultural uses interspersed on larger

allotments. The road network off Warrandyte Road is labyrinth like, following the ad hoc subdivision of a

formerly productive landscape which was developed from the early 1970s onwards within the undulating land

form of ridges, troughs and valleys leading down to the Yarra River. The movement network adopts a ‘tree-

like’ structure of local lanes which funnel into a single conduit connecting from Warrandyte Road (Newmans

Road).


7


8

planning & design framework

9. The subject site located within a Low Density Residential Zone (LDRZ). The purpose of the LDRZ is:

▪ To provide for low-density residential development on lots which, in the absence of reticulated

sewerage, can treat and retain all wastewater

10. The site is affected by a Heritage Overlay (HO115) associated with the ‘Caringa’ property oriented to

Websters Road. Front fence controls apply in addition to tree controls within the schedule. The properties

significance is as follows:

▪ The building is of local historical significance for its association with William Bloebel Orchadist in the

1920s when the districts fruit growing industry was at its peak.

11. The site is also affected by a Significant Landscape Overlay (SLO6) - low density residential significant

pine and cypress tree theme areas. The objectives of the overlay include:

▪ To encourage development that is in keeping with the area and is sympathetic to the existing built form

and any identified heritage values or other features and to ensure that development responds to the

area’s landscape and environmental characteristics, including topography, vegetation and waterways.

To ensure the visual impact of development is minimised.

12. Relevant State and Local Policy and Particular Provisions regarding design are (refer appendix b):

▪ Clause 12: Environment and Landscape Values;

▪ Clause 15: Built Environment and Heritage;

▪ Clause 21.06: Low Density;

▪ Clause 21.11: Heritage;

▪ Clause 22.03: Cultural Heritage Policy.

13. Other documents relevant to the proposal include:

▪ Victorian Government, Urban Design Charter (2010);

▪ Plan Melbourne (2014).

14. Local Policy seeks to ensure that new development within a low density setting is designed and sited to

reinforce and be respectful of the landscape and environmental characteristics of the site and its

surroundings through the application of Clause 21.06 and the SLO6. Importance is placed on the retention of

canopy cover, particularly pine and cypress trees which remain from the area’s history as a productive

landscape marked by wind breaks.


9

the proposal

15. The proposed development comprises the retention of the Caringa dwelling, with removal of some vegetation

(including Cypress Pines and agricultural outbuildings) to facilitate the construction of a new 64 bed high care

Aged Care facility in a 2 storey complex. The building comprises a courtyard plan complex of 4

interconnecting rectangular buildings, with glazed connecting segments. Parking is provided partially in

basement format with access from the west of the Websters Road frontage, with a second crossover from

Monckton Road providing access to surface parking in the north-east corner. Services, food preparation, staff

rooms and waste management is contained primarily within the basement with natural light provided by a

second tier sunken courtyard positioned centrally within the main internal courtyard.

16. The new courtyard building consolidates retirement units into a singular form, with a double loaded corridor

providing a loop of circulation to service modules oriented either into the internal on-structure courtyard or

exterior landscape. Common facilities are located to the north-east corner, whilst a series of ‘sitting’ areas

are incorporated within the glazed segments of the form.

17. The proposed form adopts a simplified gable profile with alternative gable-end orientation between each of

the 4 pavilions. Architecturally the building adopts a simplified barn type form, with a variety of cladding

materials employed to articulate the building surface with distinction between upper and lower level

treatment. Materiality comprises timber panelling, metal cladding, brickwork, various form-lined finishes to

precast concrete and feature stone cladding to vertical chimney elements.

Streetscape (east) elevation from Monckton Street showing Caringa (left) with the proposed form to the rear


10

urban design assessment

18. Prior to undertaking an assessment of the urban design attributes of the proposed development, it is

important to note that the subject site is located within an important threshold location, between the suburban

environs to the south of Warrandyte Road, and the natural / agricultural landscape of the Yarra River

Corridor and flanking parklands. Within this broader undulating district the site is located at a topographical

high point, with exposure to two street frontages, which invites an excellent opportunity for views, but

subsequently heightens visual sensitivity.

19. In general terms, I acknowledge that the proposed development incorporates some commendable attributes,

most notably through the retention of the valued Caringa dwelling and maintenance of parking in a basement

format to reduce its impact upon streetscape views. Further, the 2 storey profile demonstrates restraint in a

setting where a taller form might have sought more open and potentially profitable vistas. However, as

discussed in the following critique, I believe that the development has paid inadequate regard to its sensitive

residential interfaces and adopted a site planning, typological and massing profile which is problematic within

the undulating landscape setting.

Regional context diagram showing the transition between the suburban character to the south and parkland area to the north,

with the subject site at an important intersection within the precinct.


11

strategic context

20. Clause 21.06 and the Significant Landscape Overlay 6 provide clear direction for the design of new

development within the important setting adjacent to the Yarra River Corridor and Parkland. Whilst it is clear

that the presence and visibility of large dwellings within the setting is a strong part of the landscape

character, policy seeks to encourage new development which reinforces and respects the landscape and

environmental characteristics of the site and its surroundings. Further, the SLO6 seeks to ensure that whilst

visible, built form should be subordinate to the landscape setting. A key contribution to this character is the

presence of tall wind rows of Pine and Cypress trees which provide continuity from the legacy of former

productive land use. The protection and enhancement of these important landscape elements underpins the

inclusion of the area within the SLO6.

21. From my investigation of the site and surrounds, it is acknowledged that a key built form characteristic of the

setting is the presence of large single dwellings in a formal landscape setting. Dwellings tend to adopt a

compact plan in double storey format (ie: in a Neo-Georgian model) or a low sprawling single storey format

with wings stretching out into and framing views of the landscape (ranch / homestead style). As noted in the

figure-ground presented in the Place Values Diagram, the proposed two storey building adopts a footprint

which greatly exceeds that of the large dwellings in the surrounds. In conjunction with the uniform two storey

presentation of this footprint as extruded, this marks a significant departure from the built form character.

22. The site is located at a local regional high point, within a broader ridge along a north-south alignment, with

views out to the Dandenong and Yarra Ranges to the East and more localised views to the west within the

Manningham / Banyule Municipalities. The position of the site at an important local junction between

Monckton Road and Websters Road, and proud ‘plateau-like’ siting atop the datum established by the

basement carpark increases the perception of the form from within the surrounding streets and adjoining

private properties.

site planning & typology

23. The proposed courtyard planning strategy is in-principal a commendable strategy, and one with credible

application, both in urban and suburban areas where there is a need to create a high quality interior

landscape space, in lieu of a hostile external environment. In this open landscape setting with broad vistas,

the strategy has considerably less currency and results in a number of problematic site planning and

interface implications.


12

24. The adoption of a courtyard plan in this case pushes the built form to the site perimeter, reducing the

potential for consolidation of 2 storey built form in a small area of the site with a strong relationship to the

landscape. Through the balancing act of maintaining setbacks from neighbours to the north and west and

responding to the Caringa dwelling to the south-east, the internal proportion and subsequent function of the

courtyard is undermined, with single aspect from rooms around the perimeter of the courtyard across an on-

structure landscape. Further, the central area of the courtyard has been dropped a level below as an ad hoc

functional response to the need to admit light into service and staff areas below ground, further the usability

and amenity of the on-structure ground level outdoor space.

the courtyard format results in site planning dysfunction, due to the effect of competing setback and interface requirements

25. The creation of a space of intensity at the centre of the courtyard and wrapping built form profile has the

effect of externalising and creating a ‘residual landscape’ within the setback zones. This is contrary to the

predominant siting arrangement observed in the surrounds where buildings are configured to respond to key

external landscape elements and views, creating high quality outdoor spaces. Testament to the lack of

regard for the exterior landscape is the absence of access points from the ground level common area or

individual modules to the north and west, effectively leaving this as an ‘aesthetic space’ only, to the detriment

of future residents of the facility.


13

massing

26. The proposed building form adopts a singular continuous form of 2 levels for its entire footprint, with the

exception of the subtracted courtyard at the centre of the plan. Notably, in external views this subtracted

mass is not perceived, creating the appearance of an overwhelming building mass in the round. Whilst some

‘rebates’ have been incorporated to instate a sense of division between 4 pavilions, these are still 2 storeys

in height, simply recessed and glazed. In oblique views, these rebates will be perceived as little more than a

‘shadow gap’, whilst the overall form will present as a broad dominant form and represents a significant

departure from the character of built form in the surrounds.

27. The overall profile of the form with its broad projecting gable roof and relatively sheer external walling at its

perimeter creates an abrupt relationship with its landscape. Whilst the upper level is setback marginally from

the lower level walling where it transitions from masonry to lightweight cladding, the broad gabled roof form

incorporates a broad overhang which exaggerates the perceived scale of the form. Relative to the

topography, this extensive building mass is perched atop of the land form, with resultant exposed basement

zones to the west adjacent to 68 Websters Road. The effect of the two storey form in conjunction with the

proud siting of the mass at a high point exaggerates its scale relative to dwellings downslope to the west /

north-west.

28. Whilst large two storey forms are certainly noted in the surrounds in prominent locations, such as directly

opposite on Monckton Road, these are contained to a central location within the site, with generous spatial

separation from neighbours befitting a low density landscape setting. Conversely, some forms locate near to

boundaries (including neighbours to the north and west), but typically incorporate single storey forms, which

in conjunction with site cut reduces their profile considerably when viewed from the street or surrounding

properties. The use of single storey profiles close to boundaries in conjunction with modest site cut enables

view sharing to the benefit of the broader neighbourhood. For example, from within the living and outdoor

areas of 68 Websters Road, the dwelling at 70 Websters Road is perceived as a low foreground object only.

The proposed massing profile of continuous 2 storey form built broadly out from the centre of the site will be

a marked departure from an established development model that is a key characteristic of the setting.


14

interface management

29. Of primary concern is the relationship of the proposed development to my client’s property at 68 Websters

Road. Importantly, this property incorporates a broad outlook to the west, but also relies on an important

linear courtyard garden connected to the kitchen, dining and living area near the common boundary. This

condition is not acknowledged in the applicants drawings to date, and indeed is not accurately depicted in

sections cut through the property. This space may at first appear as a service area, however I can confirm

that it is an important, well utilised space which is sensitive to any development to its east. The condition of

the courtyard and views from within the kitchen of 68 Websters Road are shown below.

view to the location of new built form from within the kitchen of 68 Websters Road

view along the linear courtyard area adjacent to the boundary with 1 Monckton, demonstrating the quality and use of this space


15

plan study depicting the courtyard location and 2.7m height difference that results from the management of levels

30. The position of the building within the site in an elevated location atop of the basement carpark represents an

interface management concern. As depicted above, the relative finished floor level of the proposed

development is sited some 2.7m above the height of the courtyard and finished floor level of 68 Websters

road, equivalent to one residential storey in height. The result is that the 2 storey profile, albeit setback will

have the equivalent of a 3 storey presentation with the slope. No landscape plan has been presented as part

of the Amended Plans, however I am not convinced that the landscape opportunities will be realised to the

degree that it will moderate this poor interface outcome. The building form should in my view be legitimately

split to open the courtyard, or be stepped down to a single level in height to the western downslope interface.

The relative floor level in the context of the west elevation presentation is depicted below.

plan study depicting the courtyard location and 2.7m height difference that results from the management of levels


16

streetscape presentation

31. At the Websters Road elevation, it is important to note that elevation drawings do not reflect the slope of

Websters Road relative to the slope at the title boundary. This ensures that the building will sit proudly atop

of the ridge with a high degree of visibility on approach up Websters Road as shown below. Conversely

forms at 68 and 70 Websters Road as well as the dwelling opposite to the south are well nestled into

topography, with a strong landscape treatment to lessen the impact of the building within the topography. As

evident in the below image, the impact of the form elevated well above Websters Road will be further

exacerbated by the loss of a number of the trees which form the Pine wind row which dominate the vista and

currently mark the top of the hill in medium range views. The compound effect of this regrettable landscape

loss and built form siting when viewed from within Websters Road is contrary to the ambitions of the SLO6

and Clause 21.06.

view east along Websters road showing the relative site level of 1 Monckton Road compared to the lower street profile

32. At the Monckton Street elevation, I am comfortable with the presentation of the form, which adopts a series

of gable forms both parallel and perpendicular to the street in reference to the Inter-War Bungalow language

of Caringa. Whilst the built form profile at this interface is acceptable, the arrangement of parking and paths

within the setback zone to the north of Caringa compromises the streetscape presentation through excessive

hardstand areas within clear site of the public realm.


17

hatched areas around the broad building footprint depicts hardstand or on-structure zones

architectural language & materiality

33. From my observations of the context it is clear that there is no dominant architectural language or tendency

in the surrounds, and I would describe the neighbourhood as being eclectic in character. The architectural

language and material palette proposed in the development are in my view sympathetic to the Caringa

dwelling, whilst providing a natural and muted palette. The use of devices such as the chimney and

alternating gable ends are also responsive to the heritage form in a clearly contemporary manner. In my view

the building appropriately adopts a design language sympathetic to a semi-rural setting. In its entirety

however, the repetition of this positive language across the breadth of the mass of the form creates an

institutional presentation which is at odds with the dominantly low density residential setting. The repetition of

openings and broad profile in response to the internal planning requirements of the facility will be clearly

legible and there is no doubt that the form will be read as an aged care, education or some other non-

residential facility.


18

34. With respect to more detailed resolution of the elevations, there are notable areas where walling is left

unadorned devoid of appropriate window and material effects. One such example is noted adjacent to 68

Websters Road (northern third of the west elevation), where sheer walling is exposed with limited design

finesse. Despite the mix of materials employed at this elevation, the large areas of surface panelling and

service-type windows enhance the perception of bulk and subsequently appears unsightly.

west elevation showing the relatively untreated ‘service elevation’ at the northern gable end section

conclusion

35. Based on my review of the subject site and surrounds, I am of the view that the proposed development has a

lack of regard for its sensitive landscape setting and the guidance provided within Clause 21.06 and the

SLO6 which provide the overarching vision for the setting. The proposed site planning and typological

approach results in a number of dysfunctions in terms of interface management and massing, with the

resultant presentation of a continuous wrapping two storey profile exposed to two street frontages and

topographically lower neighbours. Whilst I feel that the proposal exhibits a number of commendable

attributes, there is a need for notable improvements in the shaping and organisation of the proposed form. As

suggested, there is merit in the notion of a form that steps with topography to a single storey in height

adjacent to 68 Websters Road, or alternatively the courtyard should be ‘broken’ open to integrate with the

external landscape and provide legitimate visual relief in elevation terms.

36. I have made all the enquiries that I believe are desirable and appropriate and that no matters of significance

which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld from the Tribunal.

craig czarny

MLArch BTRP AAILA RLA FPIA director hansen partnership pty ltd: 31st July 2014

appendix a

craig czarny: curriculum vitae

1

Craig Czarny: BTRP MLArch AILA RLA

qualifications

position:

professional affiliations:

awards:

special competence:

professional experience

Master of Landscape Architecture, University of Melbourne 1991. Bachelor of Town & Regional Planning, University of Melbourne 1986. Director, Urban Designer & Landscape Architect Hansen Pty Ltd, Melbourne Associate, Institute of Landscape Architects, AAILA Fellow, Planning Institute of Australian, FPIA Registered Landscape Architect, RLA Melbourne University, Postgraduate Scholarship 1990 RAPI Award for Planning Excellence (NSW) 1996 PIA Project Awards & Commendations (VIC) 03/4/5/6 Victoria Medal for Landscape Architecture 2008 Master planning, Design Development & Documentation of Public Domain projects. Townscape and Streetscape Design Assessment. Urban Design & Landscape Project Management. Urban Design Education and Training. Craig Czarny is a Director of Hansen and an Urban Designer and Landscape Architect with over 20 years experience in local and international practice. He has worked on a variety of urban planning and design projects, from broad urban character analysis to local area site planning, design and documentation. He has also served as a sessional lecturer in urban design and landscape planning at the University of Melbourne. 2002- present: Hansen Partnership Pty Ltd Sydney & Melbourne, Australia. Director: Urban Designer/ Landscape Architect 1995-2002: Context Conybeare Morrison Pty Ltd Sydney & Melbourne, Australia. Ass Director: Urban Designer/ Landscape Architect 1993-1995: James Cunning Young & Partners, Glasgow & Edinburgh, Scotland. Senior Urban Designer/ Landscape Architect 1988-1993: Wilson Sayer Core, Melbourne, Australia Urban Designer & Planner. 1989: Design Workshop, Colorado, USA Urban Design/ Landscape Intern

2

PROJECT EXPERIENCE:

CRAIG CZARNY:

site redevelopment projects Mordialloc Built Form Review Bonbeach TAFE Site Redevelopment Framework Queenscliff High School Site Development Study Knox Strategic Sites: Urban Design Review ADI Development Footscray & Maribyrnong, Cape Cabarita Residential Development Essendon Airport Redevelopment Study Dandenong Treatment Plant Site development Marolt Ranch Community Village Project Horsham Tech Park: Urban Design Guidelines Victoria Park Housing Urban Design Masterplan

retail & commercial town centre design Rosebud Activity Centre Structure Plan Moonee Valley Activity Centres Structure Plans Geelong Western Wedge: Design Framework Knox Central Urban Design Framework Forest Hill Retail Centre Planning & Design. Sydenham Town Centre Urban Design Plan. Ringwood Town Centre Design Masterplan Melton Regional Centre. Oakleigh Urban Design Framework. Carrum Urban Design Framework.

townscape & streetscape projects Ocean Beach Road, Sorrento Saigon Riverfront Masterplan, Vietnam Mersey Bluff Masterplan, Devonport Hastings Urban Design Framework Victoria St, Richmond Framework Plan Bayside Height Control/ Urban Design Study Punt Road Hoddle Street Urban Design Vision CBD Lanes Built Form Review. Manly Corso Streetscape Masterplan. St Kilda Foreshore Urban Design Study. Tunstall Square, Doncaster. Glasgow's Townhead Improvements. Ballarat Streetscape Study. Paddington Townscape Study. Liverpool Street Spanish Quarter. Petersham Streetscape Study. Queenscliffe Urban Character Study. Orchard Road Streetscape Upgrade, Singapore. Point Lonsdale Urban Design Framework

community planning & design Viengxay Town Masterplan, Viengxay, Laos RedCliffs Residential Development Plan Jackass Flat New Development Area Riverwood Housing Improvement Masterplan. MacQuarie Fields Improvement Masterplan. Ferguslie Park Common. Sydney Olympics 'Look of the Games'. Niddrie Mains Urban Design & Housing Project.

urban/landscape design documentation Wollongong Foreshore Plaza Western Sydney Park Masterplan/ Entries. Rouse Hill Regional Park. Bass Hill Plaza Memorial Parkland. Memorial Parklands. The Entrance

3

appendix b

relevant state and local policies

4

Relevant Controls

Clause 12 Environment and Landscape Values

To ensure that permitted clearing of native vegetation results in no net loss in the contribution made by native vegetation to Victoria’s biodiversity.

To protect and conserve environmentally sensitive areas. To protect landscapes and significant open spaces that contribute to character, identity and sustainable environments

Clause 15.01: Urban environment

To create urban environments that are safe, functional and provide good quality environments with a sense of place and cultural identity.

To ensure the design of subdivisions achieves attractive, liveable, walkable, cyclable, diverse and sustainable neighbourhoods.

To improve community safety and encourage neighbourhood design that makes people feel safe. To recognise and protect cultural identity, neighbourhood character and sense of place. To encourage land use and development that is consistent with the efficient use of energy and the minimisation of

greenhouse gas emissions.

Clause 21.06 Low Density

New development should be designed and sited to reinforce and be respectful of the landscape and environmental characteristics of the site and its surroundings. The importance of retaining and enhancing native vegetation cover and in some circumstances pine and cypress tree cover is an intrinsic part of the preferred character of low density residential areas.

To ensure that development does not adversely impact on the landscape character or environmental values of land. To maintain the low density character of the area. To recognise that increased densities and residential development in low density residential areas are constrained by

land capability, environmental values and lack of convenient access to physical and community infrastructure. Retain the predominance of single dwellings on allotments and discourage inappropriate residential development. Discourage the use and development of land for a second dwelling except where a second dwelling is attached by roof,

walls and floor. Ensure that the siting and design of housing development and associated infrastructure and services minimises the

extent of earthworks and responds to site constraints including slope, waterways and wildfire risk. To ensure that land is developed in a way that is compatible with the character of the area, its landscape qualities,

pattern of vegetation and environmental values. To minimise the extent of earthworks and to preserve and enhance natural drainage lines. To ensure the retention of existing trees, where appropriate, and that any landscaping complements the character of the

area. To protect and enhance landscape quality, view lines and vistas. Require that buildings and works minimise visual impact by locating away from ridgelines and exposed slopes,

incorporating screening treatments and non-obtrusive materials and colours Ensure that development on sloping sites adopts suitable design techniques that minimise earthworks and building bulk. Avoid development, including vegetation removal, on land with slopes greater than 20%. Ensure that development does not protrude above the prevailing height of the tree canopy. Ensure that existing trees are retained where appropriate and that replacement trees complement the character of the

area.

Clause 21.11 Heritage

To enhance cultural heritage through the retention and protection of significant buildings, precincts, trees and landscapes.

To minimise impacts on heritage places as a result of changes to adjoining land uses and development. To protect sites of archaeological significance. Encourage the retention of heritage fabric in development proposals. Encourage initiatives that preserve and enhance Manningham's cultural heritage.

Clause 22.03 Cultural Heritage Policy

To recognise, protect, conserve, manage and enhance identified cultural heritage places. To ensure that the significance of cultural heritage places involving the aesthetic, historic, scientific, architectural or

social value of a heritage asset to past, present and future generations, is assessed and used to guide planning decisions.

To encourage the retention of cultural heritage places and ensure that these places are recognised and afforded appropriate protection to enrich the character, identity and heritage of the municipality.

To ensure that the subdivision of a cultural heritage place does not adversely affect the identified aesthetic, historic, scientific, architectural or social value of the heritage place or other features identified in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay.

To promote the identification, protection and management of sites and areas of archaeological significance including aboriginal cultural heritage.

New works and additions Additional buildings or works on the site of a heritage building and/or located within a heritage precinct conserve,

enhance and be responsive to the heritage place and/or precinct. The development of cultural heritage places be compatible with and not adversely affect the heritage value and

significance of the cultural heritage place and/or precinct. Development adjacent to heritage places and precincts responds positively to the heritage place in terms of its bulk,

setbacks, materials, colour scheme and form. The design of new buildings not “mock” the heritage building and/or precinct, but rather complement the original fabric

and design characteristics of the heritage building and/or precinct in terms of bulk, style, materials, setbacks, colour scheme and form.

Victorian Government, Urban Design Charter (2010)

Structure: organise places so their parts relate well to each other

Accessibility: provide ease, safety and choice of access for all people

Legibility: help people to understand how places work and to find their way around

Animation: stimulate activity and a sense of vitality in public places

Fit and function: support the intended uses of spaces while also allowing for their adaptability

Complementary mixed uses: integrate complementary activities to promote synergies between them

Sense of place: recognise and enhance the qualities that give places a valued identity

Consistency and variety: balance order and diversity in the interests of appreciating both

Continuity and change: maintain a sense of place and time by embracing change yet respecting heritage values

Safety: design spaces that minimise risks of personal harm and support safe behavior

Sensory pleasure: create spaces that engage the senses and delight the mind

Inclusiveness and interaction: create places where all people are free to encounter each other as equals

application for review p295/2012

Documents