kaufland stores in victoria advisory committee 592 … · 592-694 high street epping p18018-2 5 3...

KAUFLAND STORES IN VICTORIA ADVISORY COMMITTEE

592-694 HIGH STREET EPPING

STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE BY ANDREW CLARKE ON PLANNING ISSUES

Prepared for Kaufland Australia Pty Ltd

NOVEMBER 2018

Matrix Planning Australia Pty Ltd A . C . N . 0 9 6 7 4 1 5 5 2

2 n d F l o o r , 5 0 B u d d S t r e e t C o l l i n g w o o d V i c t o r i a 3 0 6 6

T e l : + 6 1 ( 3 ) 9 4 1 9 3 2 2 2 Fa x : + 6 1 ( 3 ) 9 4 1 9 3 2 4 4


P18018-2

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION: PRACTICE NOTE – EXPERT EVIDENCE .................................................................. 1

2 SUBJECT SITE & ENVIRONS ............................................................................................................. 2

3 THE PROPOSAL ............................................................................................................................... 5

3.1 KAUFLAND STORES IN VICTORIA ..................................................................................................... 5

3.2 THE EPPING PROPOSAL ................................................................................................................. 5

4 PLANNING POLICIES & CONTROLS ................................................................................................. 6

4.1 PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK ..................................................................................................... 6

4.2 LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK ........................................................................................... 7

4.2.1 Municipal Strategic Statement ........................................................................................ 7

4.2.2 Local Planning Policies ..................................................................................................... 8

4.3 EXISTING PLANNING CONTROLS ..................................................................................................... 9

4.3.1 Zoning .............................................................................................................................. 9

4.3.2 Overlays ......................................................................................................................... 12

4.3.2.1 Parking Overlay ..................................................................................................... 12

4.3.3 Environmental Audit Overlay ........................................................................................ 13

4.3.4 Development Contributions Plan Overlay ..................................................................... 13

4.4 PARTICULAR PROVISIONS ............................................................................................................ 13

5 OTHER STRATEGIC PLANNING DOCUMENTS ................................................................................ 13

5.1 EPPING CENTRAL STRUCTURE PLAN .............................................................................................. 13

6 PROPOSED AMENDMENT ............................................................................................................. 14

7 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................................................... 15

7.1 USE AND POLICY ........................................................................................................................ 15

7.2 BUILT FORM AND LAND USE IMPACTS ........................................................................................... 16

8 RESPONSE TO SUBMISSIONS ........................................................................................................ 18

9 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................................. 20


P18018-2

1

1 INTRODUCTION: PRACTICE NOTE – EXPERT EVIDENCE

Name and Address of Expert

Andrew Clarke

Director Matrix Planning Australia 2nd Floor, 50 Budd Street Collingwood Vic 3066.

Qualifications of Expert

Bachelor of Town and Regional Planning (Hons), University of Melbourne, 1982

Member, Planning Institute of Australia

Refer Curriculum Vitae at Attachment 1.

Any Private or Business Relationship between the Expert Witness and the Party for Whom

the Report is Prepared

None.

Instructions

Written instructions from Planning and Property Partners Pty Ltd acting on behalf of Kaufland

Australia Pty Ltd and dated 2 November 2018 included at Attachment 2 to this report.

Facts, Matters and Assumptions

Facts, matters and assumptions on which opinions expressed in the report are based are set

out in the report.

Documents and Materials Taken Into Account

The documents and any literature or other materials taken into account in preparing the

report are identified in the report. I have based my assessment on the exhibited plans

(Revision A1). I understand that based on input from a range of consultants Kaufland

Australia Pty Ltd has prepared an amending set of plans (Revision ACP).

Examinations, Tests and Investigations

All examinations, tests and investigations have been undertaken by me.

Summary of Opinion

A summary of opinion is included in the Conclusion.

Provisional Opinion

There are no provisional opinions.

Relevant Questions Outside of Expertise

There are no matters of relevance outside of my expertise.


P18018-2

2

Whether the report is incomplete or inaccurate in any respect

As far as I am aware the report is not incomplete or inaccurate in any respect.

Declaration

I have made all the enquiries which 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 Committee.

2 SUBJECT SITE & ENVIRONS

The subject site, 592-694 High Street Epping is a large, highly irregularly shaped lot in 3 parts

comprising a total of 3.147 ha. It has carriageway frontage to both High Street and Cooper

Street. The lot is constrained by a number of easements.

The subject site is currently developed with a former Bunnings Warehouse building over its

eastern end currently being used as a furniture and bedding store. It also advertises it has

shared warehouse space to rent. The balance of the site is used as access, car parking and

landscaping (refer Aerial Photograph and Map 1).

The site has a fall of approximately 5 metres from west down to south-east.

The site forms part of the Epping Activity Centre. This part of the activity centre east of High

Street is known as the Epping Hub and contains a wide variety of retail, industrial, warehouse,

restricted retail, offices and food and drinks premises.

West of High Street is Epping Plaza, which contains a number of retail premises anchored by

major retailers Target, Coles, Woolworths, Big W and Harris Scarfe.

Epping Railway Station is located approximately 500 metres east of the subject site on the

north side of Cooper Street. The Epping railway line forms the eastern boundary of the

subject site.

Epping is identified as a Metropolitan Activity Centre under Plan Melbourne 2017-2050.


P18018-2

3

Aerial Photograph


P18018-2

4

Map 1: Subject site

Eastward view over subject site from High St

Epping Plaza as viewed from the subject site

N


P18018-2

5

3 THE PROPOSAL

3.1 KAUFLAND STORES IN VICTORIA

As noted in the Advisory Committee’s Terms of Reference, Kaufland is a German based

grocery chain, and a subsidiary of the Schwarz Group, the world’s fourth largest retailer.

I am instructed Kaufland currently operates in 28 countries across 11,730 stores and employs

more than 400,000 people.

The store format that is proposed in Australia as Kaufland stores will be a large full line

supermarket, larger than the largest Woolworths and Coles supermarkets.

The composition of each store is expected to be 70% food and groceries, 10% packaged liquor

and 20% in non-food and non-grocery categories.

I am instructed that the Kaufland offer will bring:

1. Regional sourcing. Some products will be sourced from the surrounding region to

maximise fresh produce;

2. A new approach to fresh food departments including direct delivery from producers and

multiple daily deliveries of fresh produce;

3. A new tier of labels. Kaufland will add to the available brand labels currently available in

supermarkets by introducing additional international brands which are not currently

available in Australia;

4. A range of non-food general merchandise items, such as crockery and cutlery, cookware,

small electrical appliances and white goods and seasonal promotions.

3.2 THE EPPING PROPOSAL

The proposal involves the demolition of the existing building and construction and use of a

new Kaufland supermarket.

The gross floor area of the new building will be 6,717m².

Component activities and their leasable floor area are proposed as:

Supermarket: 3,610m²

Liquor: 354m²

Tenancy 1: 224m²

Tenancy 2: 34m²

Administration Areas: 298m²

Food Hall: 284m²

Outdoor Eatery: 108m²


P18018-2

6

Back of House: 1,178m²

TOTAL LEASABLE 6,090m²

Non leasable areas include:

Entry: 52m²

Mall Area: 351m²

Public Toilets: 92m²

Services: 169m²

TOTAL “NON LEASABLE” 664m²

A total of 494 car spaces is proposed accessed from High Street and Cooper Street.

Loading access is from an accessway to High Street along the southern and eastern

boundaries of the site to a loading area to the north of the proposed building.

Building height ranges from 6.75 – 11.0 metres.

An integrated signage pattern including Kaufland’s corporate livery is proposed. A 22m high

3-sided pylon sign is proposed near the High Street entry (presumably internally illuminated).

I am instructed that the proposed hours of operation are 7:00 am – midnight each day.

Deliveries are proposed as up to 10 during the store opening hours and one overnight

(midnight – 7:00 am).

4 PLANNING POLICIES & CONTROLS

4.1 PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

The Planning Policy Framework is the enunciation of State and regional planning policies

common to all Victorian new format planning schemes and their respective regions. State

and regional planning policies relevant to this matter include:

Clause 11: Settlement. Planning is to anticipate and respond to the needs of existing

and future communities through provision of zoned and serviced land for housing,

employment, recreation and open space, commercial and community facilities and

infrastructure. Planning is to recognise the need for, and as far as practicable

contribute towards various outcomes including diversity of choice.

Clause 11.01-1R: Settlement – Metropolitan Melbourne. The policy seeks to focus

investment and growth in places of state significance, including Metropolitan Activity

Centres. Epping is identified as a Metropolitan Activity Centre in Melbourne 2050.


P18018-2

7

Clause 11.03-1R: Activity Centres – Metropolitan Melbourne. The relevant strategy

seeks to support the development and growth of Metropolitan Activity Centres by

ensuring they are able to accommodate significant growth for a broad range of land

uses.

Clause 11.03-1S: Planning for Places – Activity Centres. The objective seeks to

encourage the concentration of major retail, residential, commercial, administrative,

entertainment and cultural developments into activity centres that are highly

accessible to the community.

Clause 15.01-4R: Healthy Neighbourhoods – Metropolitan Melbourne. The strategy

seeks to create a city of 20 minute neighbourhoods that give people the ability to meet

most of their everyday needs within a 20 minute walk, cycle or local public transport

trip from their home.

Clause 17.01-1S: Employment - Diversified Economy. The relevant strategy seeks to

facilitate growth in a range of employment sectors, including health, education, retail,

tourism, knowledge industries and professional and technical services based on the

emerging and existing strengths of each region.

Clause 17.02-1S: Commercial – Business. The objective seeks to encourage

development that meets the community’s needs for retail, entertainment, office and

other commercial services. Relevant strategies are:

“ Ensure commercial facilities are aggregated and provide net community

benefit in relation to their viability, accessibility and efficient use of

infrastructure.

Locate commercial facilities in existing or planned activity centres.

Provide new convenience shopping facilities to provide for the needs of the

local population in new residential areas and within, or immediately

adjacent to, existing commercial centres.”

Clause 18.02-2S: Public Transport. The objective is to facilitate greater use of public

transport and promote increased development close to high-quality public transport

routes.

Clause 18.02-4S: Car Parking. The objective seeks to ensure an adequate supply of car

parking that is appropriately designed and located.

4.2 LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.2.1 Municipal Strategic Statement

The Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) is the expression of the planning vision, objectives

and strategies at the municipal level of consideration.

Under Clause 21.02-3 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme MSS the Epping Central

Metropolitan Activity Centre Is identified as major location for employment growth.


P18018-2

8

On the Municipal Framework Plan Epping is identified as a Metropolitan Activity Centre.

Clause 21.04-1: Activity Centre Planning, the MSS states:

“ The City’s established Metropolitan Activity Centre is Epping Central. The

centre has significant capacity to build on its existing commercial, service

and infrastructure assets including Epping Station, the Northern Hospital,

Melbourne Polytechnic and the Pacific Epping Shopping Centre. The

development of Epping Central provides a significant opportunity to

respond to the City of Whittlesea’s housing, employment and service

needs at a regional scale within an established urban context.”

The first objective is to provide for a number of major and neighbourhood activity centres

each with its own role and function. Relevant strategies to implement this objective are:

“ Continue to reduce the amount of escape expenditure by incorporating a

range of other employment and entertainment activities in higher order

centres.

Allocate unmet potential for the provision of retail floor space in locations

which are accessible to existing and future population and which

contribute to or promote opportunities for employment generation and

provision of public transport.”

The second objective is to support the development of Epping Central as a Metropolitan

Activity Centre. It references the Epping Central Structure Plan.

Clause 21.08 deals with Built Environment and Heritage. The third objective seeks to ensure

new development in Activity Centres achieves high quality urban design outcomes.

Clause 21.10 deals with Economic Development. Strategy 1.4 seeks to increase employment

densities with commercial and industrial development in the Epping Metropolitan Activity

Centre and Plenty Valley (South Morang) Activity Centre.

Clause 21.13 deals with Local Areas, specifically the Epping Central Metropolitan Activity

Centre. Strategy 1.3 seeks to Increase employment densities by supporting the development

of diverse office, retail and industrial uses in appropriate locations.

4.2.2 Local Planning Policies

There are no Local Planning Policies relevant to this matter.


P18018-2

9

4.3 EXISTING PLANNING CONTROLS

4.3.1 Zoning

Under the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, the subject site is in Activity Centre Zone (AZC1:

Epping Central Metropolitan Activity Centre, refer Map 2).

Map 2: Zoning

The purposes of the Activity Centre Zone are:

“ To implement the Municipal Planning Strategy and the Planning Policy

Framework.

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.


P18018-2

10

To deliver a diversity of housing at higher densities to make optimum use

of the facilities and services.

To create through good urban design an attractive, pleasant, walkable,

safe and stimulating environment.

To facilitate use and development of land in accordance with the

Development Framework for the activity centre.”

A permit is required for buildings and works, unless the schedule to the zone specifies

otherwise.

The “engine room” of the zone is in the schedule (ACZ1).

ACZ1 sets out various land use and development objectives including:

“ To significantly increase the density of new residential and commercial

development.

To strengthen links between key attractors, particularly along Cooper

Street between Epping Station, Pacific Epping, and the High Street Village

(subprecinct 1A).

To encourage a mix of uses in locations that ensure the most efficient use

of land in the centre, protect the amenity of sensitive uses, and maximise

use of existing resources, including:

Retail uses, particularly in the ‘retail core’, which diversify the local

retail offer and help to reduce escape expenditure.”

“ To facilitate the development of Precinct 6 as a major commercial precinct

with a regional retail focus that reinforces the precinct’s role as Epping

Central’s core retail area.”

“ To limit the proliferation of packaged liquor outlets and electronic gaming

machines to reduce negative impacts on community health and wellbeing.”

Built form objectives include:

“ Significantly more intensive development.

Strategic redevelopment sites developed at a scale that optimises the

opportunities presented and demonstrates exemplary architectural

quality.”

“ Contemporary architectural style which is well articulated, fit for purpose,

adaptable, robust and resilient.

High quality landscaping that is integral to the development design.

To encourage higher density development throughout the centre,

particularly within walking distance of public transport and major services,

with a built form transition towards the lower density areas outside the

activity centre.”


P18018-2

11

Under the Epping Central Framework Plan (refer Map 3) the subject site is in Precinct 6:

Regional Demand, which extends both sides of High Street south of Cooper Street.

Map 3: Epping Central Framework Plan

The proposed uses would fall within the planning scheme terms of supermarket, retail

premises (shop), food and drinks premises and bottle shop.

Supermarket, retail premises and food and drink premises are a Section 1 no permit required

uses if located in Precinct 6.

Bottle shop is a Section 2 permit required use subject to the following two conditions:

Must be located in Precinct 6 or sub-precincts 1A or 4A.

Must be at least 200 metres (measured by the shortest route accessible on foot) from

a primary school or secondary school or land in a Public Acquisition Overlay to be

acquired for a primary school or secondary school.

Both conditions are satisfied.


P18018-2

12

The control goes on to state that a permit to use land to sell packaged liquor should not be

granted if the floor area for the bottle shop component of the use (including sales and storage)

exceeds 200 m². As noted the proposed bottle shop is 354 m². The control also includes

preferred operating hours of 9:00 am to 9:00 pm.

Precinct objectives for Precinct 6 include:

“ To reinforce the role of Precinct 6 as a major commercial precinct with a

regional retail focus through the encouragement of:

Significantly more intensive uses and development of the land;”

“ To encourage a preferred character that will include:

A strong and regionally attractive range of retail, commercial,

entertainment and community service uses…”

The preferred building height is 9-25 metres.

4.3.2 Overlays

4.3.2.1 Parking Overlay

The subject site and Epping Central Activity Centre is in a Parking Overlay (PO1: Epping

Central; refer Map 4)

Map 4: Parking Overlay


P18018-2

13

The overlay prescribes car parking rates for various uses such as:

Supermarket: 5 spaces to each 100m² of leasable area;

Food and drinks premises: 3.5 spaces to each 100m² of leasable area;

Other shop: 3.5 spaces to each 100m² of leasable area.

4.3.3 Environmental Audit Overlay

The subject site is in an Environmental Audit Overlay. However no “sensitive uses” are

proposed.

4.3.4 Development Contributions Plan Overlay

The subject site is in two Development Contributions Plan Overlays (DCPO 3: Drainage

Infrastructure DCP and DCOP14: Epping Central DCP).

DCPO3 requires $1.90/m² of additional impervious floor area indexed at CPI rates.

Under DCPO14, the subject site is in Charge Area 7. The development contribution is

$8,833.29/100m², but redevelopment of an existing building is exempt if it does not add any

additional demand (units) to the land.

4.4 PARTICULAR PROVISIONS

Particular Provisions relevant to this matter include:

Clause 52.05: Signs

Clause 52.27: Licensed Premises.

Both provisions require permission for signs and licensed premises.

5 OTHER STRATEGIC PLANNING DOCUMENTS

5.1 EPPING CENTRAL STRUCTURE PLAN

The Epping Central Structure Plan (Amended December 2013) provides the strategic

justification for the current Activity Centre Zone controls and is a reference document in the

Whittlesea Planning Scheme.


P18018-2

14

The Public Transport Map on page 24 of the structure plan identifies that the subject site is

in an area designated as “significant increase in development density to integrate with public

transport interchanges”.

The Retail Policy Statement (page 31) foreshadows an additional 113,000 m² of new retail

development. The Retail Map on page 32 of the structure plan identifies the subject site as

being in an area where retail based development is supported.

The recommendations for the subject site and the area east of High Street is “Employment

focussed mixed use higher-density development. Offices and large-format retail at ground

floor with office and residential above”. (page 72).

6 PROPOSED AMENDMENT

The draft planning scheme amendment seeks to include the land in a Specific Controls

Overlay, with the use and development of the land as a Kaufland store controlled by an

Incorporated Document.

The Specific Controls Overlay was recently introduced by Amendment VC148 and is intended

to replace the Specific Sites and Exclusions Particular Provision. It is similar but the overlay

provides greater transparency by identifying the area subject to the Incorporated Document

on a planning scheme map.

I have perused the Incorporated Document. Its content is similar to a planning permit. It

provides for the following:

It provides for the subject site to be used as proposed without a permit;

It requires the land to be developed and used generally in accordance with specified

plans and detailed endorsed plans;

It contains conditions relating to:

Compliance with SEPP N-1;

Preparation of a waste management plan;

Preparation of a loading management plan;

Preparation of a landscape plan;

Traffic mitigation and management report and implementation;

Preparation of a façade and materials strategy;

ESD report and implementation;

Preparation of a construction management plan;

Signage;

Expiry of control.


P18018-2

15

As a starting point, I have no matters of substance that should also be included. Other

matters may arise as a result of submissions (particularly some conditions requested by

Government agencies) and during the course of public hearings.

The purpose of the Specific Controls Overlay is:

“ To apply specific controls designed to achieve a particular land use and

development outcome in extraordinary circumstances.”

The proposed uses and development could have been dealt with as a permit application as

none are prohibited. However, the proposal forms one of six initial sites intended for the

Kaufland entry into Victoria, some of which are currently prohibited, so a relatively simple

and standardised approvals approach has been adopted for all sites. The extraordinary

circumstance is the almost simultaneous establishment of a number of new format

supermarket stores entering the Victorian market.

7 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The proposal raises the following planning considerations:

1. Appropriateness of the use at this location from a planning policy perspective;

2. Built form and land use impacts to neighbours;

7.1 USE AND POLICY

State, regional and local policy strongly support the aggregation of retail facilities into activity

centres, and in particular identifies Metropolitan Activity Centres, such as Epping, as a focus

for investment and job creation.

Implementing this policy position, the Activity Centre Zone that applies to the subject site

identifies that supermarket, retail premises and food and drinks premises are as of right uses

in the zone that do not require planning permission.

There is no other policy or control under the Whittlesea Planning Scheme that would

represent a conflicting objective or outcome that the Advisory Committee needs to address

and balance from a net community benefit perspective.

The only policy issue raised by the proposal is the discretionary restriction of the bottle shop

to 200m² floor area and its trading hours.


P18018-2

16

A similar situation was raised in the decision of VCAT Deputy President Dwyer in Hunt Club

Commercial v Casey City Council [2013] VCAT 725. In that case Casey City Council amended

a development plan that applied to the Cranbourne East neighbourhood activity centre by

inserting a requirement that packaged liquor outlets that occupy more than 10% of the total

retail floorspace of a supermarket will not be supported. Council subsequently amended its

position that a packaged liquor outlet should have a total floor area that does not exceed

300m² of retail floor area (in the case of a stand-alone outlet) or 10% of the retail floor area

of the supermarket (in the case of the outlet being a component of a supermarket) and It

should be subject to trading hours that are responsive to the need to minimise alcohol-

related harms and associated amenity impacts in the Cranbourne community, having regard

to the outcomes of a social and economic impact analysis.

The Tribunal found:

“ …the scope of relevant considerations under clause 52.27 of the Casey

Planning Scheme is not restricted solely to impacts which manifest

themselves into an amenity impact on the surrounding area. However, as

a matter of general principle, a broad concern about the social harm

caused by alcohol, the accessibility of alcohol in the community generally,

or the potential for the abuse or misuse of alcohol, will rarely (if ever) be

a relevant planning consideration in the exercise of discretion for a

particular licensed premises under clause 52.27.”

On this basis the Tribunal ordered the Council proposed amendments be deleted.

I find no reason for the limitations sought other than to address the social harm related to

the abuse or misuse of alcohol. This is evidenced in the last dot point of Clause 2.0: Land Use

and Development Objectives to be Achieved in ACZ1 which seeks “to limit the proliferation

of packaged liquor outlets and electronic gaming machines to reduce the negative impacts

on community health and wellbeing”. I find the circumstances of both cases are similar and

the control should be given little weight. Nevertheless, an additional condition could be

included in the Incorporated Document restricting the hours of the bottle shop, say from

9:00 am – 9:00 pm.

I note the Incorporated Document does not prescribe general hours of operation (noting

above they are proposed as 7:00 am – midnight, daily). Given the uses other than bottle

shop are as of right in the existing ACZ1 I consider a limit is unnecessary and there are no

sensitive uses proximate to the site that would necessitate such a control. If such a control

was proposed it should be qualified by words such as “Except with the further consent of the

responsible authority,…”.

7.2 BUILT FORM AND LAND USE IMPACTS

The proposed building is contemporary but nevertheless uncomplicated in design. External

building materials are predominantly timber pattern and dark grey cladding and glass.

The building footprint is substantially smaller than the existing former Bunnings store

building.


P18018-2

17

The location of the proposed access arrangements for cars and delivery vehicles are

unchanged from the present. The loading bay and loading access are well removed from

sensitive uses such as dwellings.

The site is well removed from sensitive uses such as dwellings, the closest of which are on

the opposite side of Cooper Street. The distance between those dwellings and the proposed

building is approximately 150 metres so there will be no adverse built form impacts.

ACZ1 contemplates (Clause 5.6-2):

“ Multi-level mixed use development with active frontages, increased built

form presence to Cooper Street, High Street and Deveny Road, with

reduced visual presence of parking and paved areas.”

Whilst the Committee will be receiving separate urban design evidence, I make the following

observations about this:

This side of High Street comprising mostly retail uses is predominantly single storey in

character;

The proposal does not contemplate a mix of uses other than retail;

The existing character of the site is of a single level building behind car parking visible

and extending to High Street;

Other than access, the subject site does not have a High Street frontage;

The existing character of the opposite side of High Street and the south side of Cooper

Street west of High Street is generally buildings located behind car parking visible and

extending to both street frontages;

Much of the western portion of the site is affected by carriageway easements.

In terms of pedestrian access, the site is closer to the Epping Railway Station than other

supermarkets in the Epping Metropolitan Activity Centre with access proposed from Cooper

Street along a dedicated footpath to the store entry. Footpath access is also proposed from

the High Street access point to the store entry. Signalised pedestrian crossings are provided

at the High Street entry providing access to other parts of the activity centre west of High

Street and around the station with either existing or proposed new footpath access.

In terms of advertising, the advertising theme appears to be well integrated. However, the

22m high pylon sign appears to me to be unnecessarily high. Again, I understand separate

urban design advice will be provided to the Committee.

I understand that parking is provided at rates higher than the minimum planning scheme

requirements. An over-provision is of no particular concern. An under-provision would be

more of a concern.


P18018-2

18

8 RESPONSE TO SUBMISSIONS

Submissions E01 and EO5: VicRoads

Many of the conditions requested are already covered in the Incorporated Document.

Subject to expert traffic engineering, urban design and landscaping advice other detailed

matters raised could also be included.

Submission E03: City of Whittlesea (Draft)

Refer to Sections 7.1 and 7.2 of this report.

In addition:

Signage

I agree the 22 metre high pylon sign is unnecessarily excessive.

Landscaping and Water Sensitive Urban Design

These matters are dealt with as conditions (ESD and landscaping) in the Incorporated

Document.

Open Space

A pedestrian plaza is now proposed.

Appendix 1

I note the submission includes development proposals for land that is outside the Kaufland

site or extensively covered by carriageway easements (refer also to Submission E04). The

pedestrian connections/links are provided (their adequacy to be addressed by traffic

engineering evidence).

Submission E04: Tract on behalf of Aventus Epping

Retaining Wall

I note a ramp connection between both sites is now proposed through the proposed

retaining wall.

Land Use Exemptions

I note the Incorporated Document requires the endorsed plans to be generally in accordance

with specified plans which are prescriptive about permitted uses and does not mention the

uses raised.

Advertising Sign

I agree the 22 metre high sign is excessive.

Submission E06: Transport for Victoria

The first two conditions can be included as requirements of the CMP. The third condition can

be treated as a separate condition in the Incorporated Document. All are relatively standard

conditions.


P18018-2

19

Submission E07: IGA Epping

Submission G03: Ritchies Stores

Submission G04: Victorian Small Business Commission

Increased competition, possible store closures, employment issues

The submission raises principally economic competition arguments and I understand

economic evidence will be provided to the Advisory Committee.

Process

The process provides a public forum for written and verbal submissions.

Submission E08: BMDA on behalf of QIC and Bevendale

Planning Policy

Other than the bottle shop, all uses are as of right no permit required uses in the ACZ1.

Use of SCO

The use of SCO and its associated Incorporated Document is similar to a planning permit that

would issue under ACZ1.

Inconsistent with Epping Central Structure Plan

Refer to Section 7.2 of this report.

Submission G01: EPA

Land Use Conflict

The site is not proximate to residential uses that would necessitate the suggested delivery

times.

SEPP N1

Compliance with SEPP N1 is included in the Incorporated Document.

Construction Management

The Incorporated Document requires a CMP. The specific matters raised could also be

itemised in the control.

Submission G02: Fastnet Consulting on behalf of Master Grocers Association

Planning Policy

Other than the bottle shop, all uses are as of right no permit required uses in the ACZ1.

No floor space cap

There is no floor apace cap in the existing ACZ1. Retail floor space caps are usually avoided

in Metropolitan Melbourne retailing zones. In any event the Incorporated Document

requires the uses and development to be generally in accordance with specified plans which

specify floor areas for the various activities proposed.


P18018-2

20

Increased competition, possible store closures, employment issues

The submission raises economic competition arguments and I understand economic

evidence will be provided to the Advisory Committee.

Inconsistent with ACZ1

Refer to Section 7.2 of this report.

9 CONCLUSIONS

I am of the view that:

1. In terms of the existing planning policy and control matrix the proposed Kaufland store

at Epping is strongly supported by State, regional and local policy and that there are no

competing policies that need to be considered. The principal uses are already as of right

uses in the existing Activity Centre Zone that do not require a permit.

2. There are no adverse land use or built form impacts of the proposal to neighbours.

I have made all of 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 Advisory Committee.

Andrew Clarke B.TRP (Hons.), MPIA

16 November 2018


P18018-2

1

ATTACHMENT 1: ANDREW CLARKE CURRICULUM VITAE


P18018-2

1

CURRICULUM VITAE

ANDREW CLARKE

OCCUPATION: Consultant Town Planner

DATE OF BIRTH: 9th July 1960

NATIONALITY: Australian

ACADEMIC QUALIFICATIONS:

Bachelor of Town and Regional Planning (Hons.), University of Melbourne, 1982

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS:

Corporate Member, Planning Institute of Australia

Member, Victorian Planning and Environmental Law Association

SUMMARY OF CAREER HISTORY:

Director, Matrix Planning Australia Pty Ltd, 2001-present

Planning Manager, Fisher Stewart Pty Ltd, 1995-2001

Senior Planner, SJB Planning Pty Ltd, 1993-1995

Senior Planner, Fisher Stewart Pty Ltd, 1992-1993

Town Planner/Senior Planner/Associate, Wilson Sayer Pty Ltd/Wilson Sayer Core Pty Ltd, 1982-1991

OVERVIEW OF EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE

Since 1982, Andrew Clarke has been employed as a consultant town planner, providing advice to private individuals

and firms, as well as Commonwealth, State and local government.

The particular expertise of Andrew Clarke has been in the area of planning and development approvals associated

with a range of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational and institutional development projects.

Andrew regularly appears as an expert witness in planning panels, tribunals and courts. Between 1988 and 2015,

Andrew was regularly appointed by the Minister for Planning to sit on and chair planning panels and enquiries

including advisory committees, environment effects statements and planning scheme amendments.

Andrew is a former secretary (1990-91 and 1992-93) and chair (1993-94) of the Australian Association of Planning

Consultants (Victoria Division).

Andrew established Matrix Planning Australia Pty Ltd in June 2001 as a town planning consultancy.


P18018-2

2

Representative projects undertaken by Andrew under the Matrix Planning Australia Pty Ltd banner include:

Melbourne Cricket Ground Northern Stand Redevelopment for MCG5 Sports Architects on behalf of the

Melbourne Cricket Club and Melbourne Cricket Ground Trust (2001)

Central Creek Grasslands Residential Subdivision and Conservation Project for the Urban and Regional Land

Corporation (2001)

Pharmacy College, Redevelopment, Royal Parade Parkville for the City of Melbourne (2001)

Watt Road Mornington, Residential Rezoning and 100 Lot Subdivision for private client (2001-2002)

CSIRO Division of Petroleum Resources, Syndal, Subdivision Development, for CSIRO (2002)

Hutchison Telecommunications Mobile Phone Towers Visual Impact Assessment, Hoppers Crossing (2001)

Marlows Ltd, Marlows automotive outlets, Sunshine and Preston (2001-2002)

Melbourne Sports and Aquatic Centre, Stage 2 Redevelopment for 2006 Melbourne Commonwealth Games

(2002)

The Esplanade Hotel, St Kilda Redevelopment for the City of Port Phillip (2002)

Deakin University Melbourne Campus, Burwood, development control advice for Deakin University (2002)

BassGas Project Environmental Effects Statement Panel Inquiry Chair for Victorian Department of

Infrastructure (2002)

Cheltenham Green: Land Subdivision, Apartment and Townhouse Complex, Cheltenham for VicUrban

(2003) (2008 Winner Urban Development Institute of Australia (Vic) Award for Excellence in the category

of Urban Renewal Projects)

West Field Coal Mine Hazelwood Project, for International Power – Hazelwood (2004-2005)

Various School Building and Site Extensions for Brighton Grammar School (2004)

Parkside Gardens Residential Subdivision, Shepparton, for VicUrban (2004)

South Melbourne Supermarket and Mixed Use Commercial Development, for private client (2005)

Mortlake Gas Fired Power Station, for Origin Energy (2005-2006)

School Expansion Planning Scheme Amendment and Stage 1 Buildings Permit, for Donvale Christian College

(2005-2006) and Plenty Valley Christian College (2008-2009)

Princes Highway, Traralgon Bypass, for Department of Primary Industries (2007)

Shaw River Gas Fired Power Station and Gas Pipeline, for Santos Ltd (2009-2010)

Planning Controls Assessment, Nelson Place, Williamstown for Nelson Place Village Pty Ltd (2011)

Numerous Licensed Premises Amenity Impact Assessments (ongoing)

Numerous residential unit and land subdivision proposals for various private clients (ongoing)

Numerous highest and best use advices and opinions in relation to land acquisition and compensation cases


P18018-2

3

ATTACHMENT 2: INSTRUCTIONS