pro-forma for notice paper word 7 - city of stonnington€¦ · web viewi am not aware of any...

NOTICE PAPER

Monday 20 May 2013 at 7:00 p.m.

Council Chamber, Stonnington City Centre(enter off Glenferrie Road, Malvern)

RECONCILIATION STATEMENT

We acknowledge that we are meeting on the traditional land of the Boonwurrung and Wurundjeri people and offer our respects to the elders past and present. We recognise and respect the cultural heritage of this land.

PRAYER

Almighty God, we humbly beseech you, to grant your blessing on this Council, direct and prosper its deliberations to the advancement of your glory, and the true welfare of the people of the City of Stonnington. Amen.

NOTE

Council business is conducted in accordance with Part 4 Division 3 of the Meeting Procedure section of Council’s General Local Law 2008 (No 1). Some copies are available with the agenda or you can find a copy on Council’s website www.stonnington.vic.gov.au under local laws.

http://www.stonnington.vic.gov.au/

Council MeetingNotice Paper20 May 2013

Order of Business and Indexa) Reading of the Reconciliation Statement and Prayer;b) Apologies;c) Adoption and confirmation of minutes of previous meeting(s) in accordance with Section 63 of

the Act and Clause 423 of General Local Law 2008 (No 1);d) Disclosure by Councillors of any conflicts of interest in accordance with Section 79 of the Act1

e) Questions to Council from Members of the Public;f) Correspondence – (only if related to council business);g) Questions to Council Officers from Councillors;h) Tabling of Petitions and Joint Letters;i) Notices of Motion;j) Reports of Special and Other Committees; - Assembly of Councillorsk) Reports by Delegates;l) General Business;

1. PLANNING APPLICATIONS........................................................................................................................... 61.1. PLANNING PERMIT 0677/12 - 1A MERCER ROAD, ARMADALE – S72 AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE A

RESTAURANT AND CAFE LIQUOR LICENCE ASSOCIATED WITH THE AS OF RIGHT USE OF THE SITE AS A RESTAURANT IN A BUSINESS 1 ZONE AND A WAIVER OF THE CAR PARKING REQUIREMENTS................6

1.2. PLANNING APPLICATION 0428/12 - 641 - 651 DANDENONG ROAD, MALVERN – PART DEMOLITION AND BUILDINGS AND WORKS TO AN EXISTING HOTEL, INCREASE TO PATRON NUMBERS AND THE RED LINE AREA WHERE LIQUOR CAN BE CONSUMED OR SUPPLIED, SIGNAGE AND REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF CAR SPACES REQUIRED................................................................................................................... 13

1.3. PLANNING PERMIT 0600/08 - 241 & 257 TOORAK ROAD & 625 CHAPEL STREET, SOUTH YARRA – S87A AMENDMENT APPLICATION TO VCAT FOR ALTERATIONS TO THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT.....33

2. CITY OF STONNINGTON – CYCLIST REFERENCE GROUP................................................................................513. DEFIBRILLATORS AT LOCAL SPORTING CLUBS............................................................................................554. MUIR PAVILION CHANGE ROOM REFURBISHMENT– PLAQUE APPROVAL.........................................................585. LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONSTITUTIONAL RECOGNITION – MAV CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION...............................606. councillor code of conduct...................................................................................................................... 61

1 Note that s.79(1)(a) of the Act requires Councillors to disclose the nature of a conflict of interest immediately before the relevant consideration or discussion.

m) Urgent Business; andn) Confidential Business.1. PRAHRAN MARKET MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT………………………………………………64

ADOPTION AND CONFIRMATION OF MINUTESOF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

20 MAY 2013

RECOMMENDATION

That the Council confirms the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Stonnington City Council held on 6 May 2013 and Minutes of the Confidential Meeting of the Stonnington City Council held on 6 May 2013 as an accurate record of the proceedings.

GENERAL BUSINESS20 MAY 2013

1. PLANNING APPLICATIONS

1.1. PLANNING PERMIT 0677/12 - 1A MERCER ROAD, ARMADALE – S72 AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE A RESTAURANT AND CAFE LIQUOR LICENCE ASSOCIATED WITH THE AS OF RIGHT USE OF THE SITE AS A RESTAURANT IN A BUSINESS 1 ZONE AND A WAIVER OF THE CAR PARKING REQUIREMENTS

(Statutory Planning Coordinator: Andrea Pagliaro)(General Manager: Stuart Draffin)

PURPOSE

For Council to consider a planning application pursuant to Section S72 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 for a Restaurant and Cafe Liquor Licence associated with the as of right use of the site as a Restaurant in a Business 1 Zone and a waiver of the car parking requirements at 1A Mercer Road, Armadale

Executive Summary

Applicant: Adam DiamondWard: SouthZone: Business 1Overlay: nilDate lodged: 16/11/2012Statutory days: 131 Trigger for referral to Council:

7 Objections and Councillor Call Up

Patron Numbers: 88 (including 48 externally) Number of objections: 11 objectionsConsultative Meeting: Yes, held on 12 February 2013Officer Recommendation: Issue a Notice of Decision to Amend a Planning Permit

BACKGROUND

History of Current Planning Permit

Planning Permit 677/12 for the land at 1A Mercer Road, Armadale was issued on 31 October 2012 for a reduction in the car parking requirements associated with the use of the site as a food and drink premises (cafe) in a Business 1 Zone.

A food and drink premises (cafe) is a as of right use in the Business 1 Zone and as such, no conditions specifying hours of operation or patron numbers is detailed on the existing permit.

A footpath trading permit has been granted for the premises by Councils Local Laws Department. Seating is permitted in the area outside the existing cafe along Mercer Road.


History of Relevant Planning Permits

Planning Permit No.1032/04 at Shop 6, 1155-1161 High Street, Armadale for the dispensation of car parking for a 50 seat restaurant (40 seats between 7am and 6:30pm); and an on-premises liquor licence from 7am to 12 midnight on any day was refused by Council on 22 March 2005 . Council Officers recommended that the permit be granted subject to conditions restricting the liquor licence hours in the footpath trading area along Mercer Road to no later than 10:00pm on any night.

The Proposal

The plan that forms part of the basis of Council's consideration was prepared by the applicant and can be described as a floor plan of the restaurant. The application was received on 19 November 2012.

The proposed amendment includes the following:

Use of the site as a restaurant (as of right). Restaurant and Cafe liquor licence associated with the use. Licensed to serve liquor from 10:00am – 10:00pm Monday to Friday and from 8:00am-

10:00pm Saturday to Sunday Maximum of 88 patrons (40 internally and a maximum of 48 patrons externally in the

existing outside footpath trading area) No on-site car parking is to be provided on-site. The applicant seeks a car parking waiver

for the use of the site as a restaurant (as of right).

Site and Surrounds

The site is located on the northern side of High Street on the western with Mercer Road. The subject site is occupied by a two storey commercial building with a frontage to Mercer Road of approximately 30 metres and a frontage to High Street of approximately 6 metres. The total site area is approximately 174 metres. The subject tenancy is approximately 53 square metres in area and is a ground floor tenancy located to the rear of 1153 High Street. Access to the tenancy is from Mercer Road. The tenancy is in use as Le Petit Prince Cafe.

The site is situated in a Major Activity Centre which is accessible by both Malvern and Armadale Train Stations and via trams which run along High Street and Glenferrie Road.

The land to the north on both sides of Mercer Road is zoned Residential, and there exists a row of dwellings on both sides of the road. To the immediate east, on the opposite side of Mercer Road, land is zoned Business 1 and comprise of two storey building with tenancies fronting High Street and Mercer Road used for commercial purposes. Land to the south along High Street is zoned Business 1 and contains a mix of uses including cafe and restaurants.

The Title

The site is described on Certificate of Title Volume 10377 Folio 922 / Lot 1 on Plan of Subdivision 502229T and no covenants or easements affect the land.

Planning Controls

Clause 34.01 Business 1 Zone


Pursuant to Clause 34.01-1 a permit is not required for a use in the Section 1 table of uses. A ‘Restaurant’ is in Section 1 and as such a permit is not required for the use

Particular Provisions:

Clause 52.06 - Car Parking

Pursuant to the table at Clause 52.06-5 a ‘Restaurant’ use requires 0.4 spaces per patron. A total of 88 patrons are proposed and as such, the applicant is seeking a car parking waiver for 35 car parking spaces.

It is noted that the applicant has already been granted a car parking waiver for the existing use of the site as a cafe. A food and drink premises (cafe) has a rate of 4 spaces per 100sqm of leasable floor areas. The cafe has a leasable floor area of 53 sqm and as such, a waiver of 2 car parking spaces was granted.

Clause 52.27 Licensed Premises

Pursuant to Clause 52.27 a permit is required to use land to sell or consume liquor if a license is required under the Liquor Control Act 1998. A permit is required for the cafe and restaurant liquor licence proposed.

Relevant Planning Policies

Clause 22.10 Licensed Premises PolicyClause 32.04 Business 1 ZoneClause 52.06 Car ParkingClause 52.27 Licenced Premises Clause 65 Decision Guidelines

Advertising

The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land and by placing 1 sign on the site. The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily.

The site is located in South Ward and 11 objections have been received. The objections can be summarised as follows: Parking Noise Traffic on footpath Traffic Limited space for a commercial kitchen Extended hours One toilet being provided Disposal of rubbish Public intoxication Vehicles blocking laneway Delivery vehicles illegally parking Increase in litter Decrease in property value Future possible use Advertising sign not displayed appropriately


A Consultative Meeting was held on 12 February 2013. The meeting was attended by Councillor Sehr and Councillor Ullin, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council planning officer. The meeting did not result in any changes to the plans. However, the applicant has advised they are willing to accept a permit condition on any amended permit issued restricting the hours to the following:

Monday to Thursday 10:00am to 8:00pm Friday 10:00am to 10:00pm Saturday 8:00am to 10:00pm Sunday 8:00am to 8:00pm

KEY ISSUES

The site is located in an established Major Activity Centre adjacent to High Street where a mix of liquor licences exists. The alcohol consumption is proposed to be in conjunction with the serving of food at the proposed restaurant (as of right) and as such, a Restaurant and Cafe Liquor Licence is being applied for. The licence will also include the existing outside dining area along Mercer Road.

It is noted that the use currently operates as Le Petit Prince, a cafe serving meals and non alcoholic drinks. The use is intended to be the same however, given the extension of hours and the introduction of a liquor licence it is more appropriate to consider the use as a restaurant.

The proposal complies with the relevant objectives and policy statements of the Licensed Premises Policy at Clause 22.10 and the decision guidelines of the Licensed Premises Particular Provision at Clause 52.27. The hours of operation (i.e. finish time of 10:00pm) meets the suggested parameters provided in Clause 22.10 for a site located nearby a Residential 1 Zone. Furthermore, given such a licence requires that 75 % of people who are consuming alcohol be also be seated and consuming food as part of a meal, it is not considered that this proposal will result in instances of intoxication or anti social behaviour. A condition will be placed on any amended permit stating that the predominant activity on site is the serving of meals. As such, the proposal to incorporate a liquor licence is not considered to adversely affect the amenity of the area in accordance with Clause 22.10-3.

It is noted that there are a number of uses in the immediate area that operate with a Restaurant and Cafe Liquor Licence. Most notably is Crust Gourmet Pizza which is located opposite the subject site at 1164 High Street. This operates with a Restaurant and Cafe Liquor Licence seven days a week. The licence allows alcohol to be served till 11:00pm however, it is noted that the restaurant operates till 11:00pm on Friday and Saturday and 10:00pm on all other days.

The proposal seeks licensed hours until 10:00pm seven days a week which is not considered unreasonable in a Major Activity Centre where a mix of uses and liquor licences exist. However, given the sensitive residential abuttal to the north and north east, a reduction in the week time trading hours is considered necessary to ensure an acceptable level of amenity for existing residential properties. The applicant has agreed to revise the proposed hours to the following:

Monday to Thursday 10:00am to 8:00pm Friday 10:00am to 10:00pm Saturday 8:00am to 10:00pm Sunday 8:00am to 8:00pm

It is therefore considered appropriate to place a condition on any amended permit restricting the hours to as detailed above. This will ensure the use will not have an unreasonable impact on the sensitive residential areas.


The proposed liquor licence is not considered to lead to excessive noise levels however, it is deemed appropriate to place permit conditions on any permit issued requiring that any music in the restaurant be limited to background music only, there be no speakers externally and any noise levels need to comply with the State Environment Protection Policy.

Concerns were also raised with the noise associated with the disposal of bottles. A condition will be placed on any permit issued requiring bottles and rubbish not be removed from within the premises between the hours of 10pm and 7am the following day.

The proposal as discussed above meets the decision guidelines set out at Clause 52.27 and the policy objectives and decision guidelines at Clause 22.10 as such, it is considered that the proposal can be supported.

Car Parking

Given the extension of hours proposed, it is considered more appropriate to consider the existing use as a restaurant instead of a cafe. It is highlighted that the use is currently in operation as a Food and Drink Premises (cafe).

According to the provisions of the Car Parking Table at Clause 52.06-5 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, the car-parking rate for a restaurant is 0.4 spaces to each patron.

The proposal is for an 88 patron establishment, which would generate a requirement of 35 car parking spaces. No on-site car parking is proposed and as such, the applicant seeks a full car parking waiver.

When assessing whether or not the local parking and transport network can accommodate for the proposed car-parking shortfall, it is considered appropriate to note the following:

- The subject site is accessible by major forms of public transport, with trams and buses operating along High Street.

- It is envisaged that customers are likely to be people who live or work in the area and as such they are likely to walk to the premises.

- Customers are also most likely to visit other shops and as such the proposal will attract foot traffic.

- For those customers who would use a vehicle, it is considered that the amount of available car park spaces nearby will accommodate the parking needs generated by the proposal, with short term parking available along High Street.

Based on this information, a car parking waiver can be given to this proposal. The permit conditions will ensure that no more than 88 patrons may be housed within the restaurant (including no more than 48 patrons in the outside area).

Objections

In response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following comments are made: Concerns were raised with the future possibility of the use changing. This is not a valid

planning consideration given assessment is limited to what has been proposed, not what may or may not occur in the future. If a permit was issued, any changes to the permitted use would require an amendment which would be assessed on its merits at the time the application is made.

Decrease in property value is not a planning consideration. Size of kitchen and number of toilets is not a planning consideration as the use is as of right.


Concerns were raised with the traffic created along the footpath. The outside trading area has already been approved under Councils Local Laws and is currently in use by the existing cafe.

Concerns were raised with vehicles associated with the use illegally parking and blocking the rear laneway. It is noted that the use is as of right and does not require a planning permit. However, like any other vehicles, vehicles associated with the use must abide by the Victorian road rules and parking restrictions.

Increase in litter associated with the use. The use is as of right however, patrons of the restaurant like any other person should not litter and are subject to potential fines by police if caught littering.

Advertising sign not displayed appropriately. The applicant submitted a Statutory Declaration to confirm that the advertising sign had been displayed for 14 days. Letters were also sent to surrounding properties. It is considered the sign was displayed in an appropriate way and the advertising process was completed satisfactorily.

CONCLUSION

Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended that the proposed amendment be supported for the following reasons: The proposed use is consistent with Clause 22.10 (Licensed Premises Policy) and Clause

52.27 (Licensed Premises).

Human Rights Consideration

This application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State Government and which complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.

RECOMMENDATION

That a Notice of Decision to Amend Planning Permit No: 677/12 for the land located at 1A Mercer Road, Armadale be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme to amend the permit and plans as follows:

Amend Permit Preamble as follows:

Restaurant and Cafe Liquor Licence associated with the as of right use of the site as a Restaurant in a Business 1 Zone and a waiver of the parking requirements at 1A Mercer Road, Armadale

Addition of new conditions 2 to 9 as follows:

2. Without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority, the sale of liquor must only occur within the premises and the approved footpath dining area between the hours of:

a. -10:00am – 8:00pm Monday to Thursdayb. 10:00am -10:00pm Friday c. -8:00am – 10:00pm Saturdayd. -8:00am to 8:00pm Sunday


3. A maximum number of 88 patrons may be catered for by the premises (including a maximum of 48 patrons within the existing footpath dining area) at any one time to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

4. The provision of music and entertainment on the premises must be limited to background music or entertainment by performers using non-amplified instruments unless with the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

5. Bottles and rubbish must not be removed from within the premises between the hours of 10pm and 7am the following day.

6. Noise emanating from the subject land must comply with State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Music Noises from Public Premise) No. N-2, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

7. There must be no external speakers or outdoor music unless with the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

8. The predominant activity carried out at all times on the licensed premises must be the preparation and serving of meals for consumption on the licensed premises to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

9. Tables and chairs must be placed in position on the licensed premises so as to be available for at least 75% of the patrons attending the premises at any one time, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

The conditions will be renumbered accordingly

Addition of the following note to the permit:

- Background music level, in relation to premises, means a level that enables patrons to conduct a conversation at a distance of 600 millimetres without having to raise their voices to a substantial level.

Amendment to plans as follows:

- Detail of the red line area


1.2. PLANNING APPLICATION 0428/12 - 641 - 651 DANDENONG ROAD, MALVERN – PART DEMOLITION AND BUILDINGS AND WORKS TO AN EXISTING HOTEL, INCREASE TO PATRON NUMBERS AND THE RED LINE AREA WHERE LIQUOR CAN BE CONSUMED OR SUPPLIED, SIGNAGE AND REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF CAR SPACES REQUIRED


PURPOSE

For Council to consider a planning application for part demolition, buildings and works to an existing Hotel in a Business 2 Zone and Heritage Overlay, and a subsequent variation to the existing liquor licence to increase patron numbers and increase the area where liquor is allowed to be consumed or supplied, advertising signage, and a reduction in the number of car spaces required at 641-651 Dandenong Road, Malvern.

Executive Summary

Applicant: Glenthorn Pty Ltd C/- Priority Planning Pty LtdWard: SouthZone: Business 2Overlay: Heritage OverlayDate lodged: 5/07/2012Statutory days: (as at council meeting date)

161

Trigger for referral to Council:

Policy

Patron Numbers: Increase from 420 to 575 or 700 for pre- booked functionsNumber of objections: Four (4)Consultative Meeting: NoOfficer Recommendation: Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit

BACKGROUND

The Proposal

The plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by ITN Architects, and are known as Drawing No.s: TP01 – TP07 and TP09 Council date stamped 22 October 2012, TP07A – TP08 Council date stamped 16 November 2012, and TP10 – TP13 Council date stamped 23 November 2012.

Key features of the proposal are:

Increase in Hotel patron numbers from 420 to 575, or 700 for ‘pre-booked’ functions. Increase to the red line area for a small portion of the north-west corner of the site

(approximately 50m²). Partial demolition of the existing building, including the bottle shop and associated drive

through, and the northern section of the building. Liquor would still be sold (in reduced volumes) ‘over the bar’. The Hotel would be internally rearranged to have the following layout (west to east):


o Public bar and wine bar with substantial provision for seating.o Lounge bar with seating, central toilet facilities.o Dining room with tables and boothso Large kitchen and associated amenities.o Relocated gaming room. No changes are proposed to the existing number of

gaming machines.o Lounge and gaming toilet facilities.o Two new courtyards are proposed to the north side of the building, one off the

gaming room and one with access via the dining room and public bar. o The courtyard to be accessed from the dining room and public bar would have a

timber decking floor and a substantial provision of seating. A bar would also service the external courtyard. The maximum number of patrons in the courtyard accessed from the dining room and public bar would be 200 and it would close at 1am on any given day.

o Landscaping and a timber decking ramped access would be located to the north side of the building adjacent to the car park.

The existing Hotel car park would have a modified layout. Existing crossovers and access would be maintained, save for the drive through bottle shop crossover, which will be reinstated.

One additional car space is proposed within the existing Hotel car park and a new layout, to provide 46 spaces.

The exterior of the building façade would be repainted (no permit required) and all existing signage would be removed.

The existing paint to the northern elevation of the existing building would be removed by sandblasting to expose original bricks.

The entry doors to both the Glenferrie Road and Dandenong Road facades will be removed and replaced with timber framed clear glass doors.

The corner entry door will be replaced with a window and the lower section bricked up to match existing.

A new glazed square tile dado would extend along the lower section of the both facades of the existing building.

A single storey extension is proposed to the east side of the building for a new gaming room in the location of the existing bottle shop/drive through. The extension would be finished in timber cladding with a metal mesh frame to a central vertical element in the south and east elevations for planting.

The existing first floor level would be maintained as staff offices and facilities. The existing external stair access to this level would be demolished.

The courtyard accessed from the dining area and public bar would have fixed canvas awnings along the northern side and above seating, in addition to canopies over the entry points and bar.

New decorative wrought iron access gates and fencing is proposed along the eastern boundary abutting Glenferrie Road, between the existing building and northern boundary.

New signage is proposed to the south and east facades of the new single storey extension to future detail.


Site and Surrounds

Subject Site

The site is located on the north-east corner of the intersection of Dandenong Road and Glenferrie Road, Malvern. The land is occupied by a two storey building known as the Angel Hotel.

The site is irregular in shape with a frontage to Dandenong Road of 57.89m, a frontage to Glenferrie Road of 26.47m, and a total site area of approximately 2611m². The site abuts the railway reserve for a majority of its northern boundary.

The site is located within an individual Heritage Overlay 403, and the relevant citation identifies the building as having an A2 grading. A hotel was first constructed on this site sometime before 1856. This building was altered in the 1880s and then extensively remodelled c1925 to create the hotel's present interwar Free Classical style facade. The existing building is the former ‘Railway Hotel’ and is architecturally significant and a fine and largely intact example of a hotel with a restrained interwar Free Classical style facade.

The hotel occupies the western half of the site and a car park occupies the northern portion and south-eastern portion of the site, and caters to 46 (45 useable) car spaces.

A bottle shop and drive through is located to the east side of the building and vehicle access is available via a crossover to Dandenong Road. Access to the Hotel car park is via a separate crossover to Dandenong Road and from Station Place.

The hotel enjoys existing use rights with a 24 hour late night general licence Monday to Saturday and between 10am and 7am the following day on Sundays, Good Friday and Anzac Day Between 12 noon and 1 a.m. the following morning. Off premises sale and consumption is also permitted between 10am and midnight Sundays, and any other day between 7am and 12 midnight (Good Friday & Anzac Day Between 12 noon and 12 midnight). There are no Planning Permits that control hours or patron numbers for the existing Hotel.

The existing liquor licence allows a patron capacity of 210 persons in the lounge/dining area, 80 persons in the wine bar/lounge and 130 persons in the beer garden. It is noted no beer garden currently exists. The Applicant has advised it was operational until the late 1970’s at which time it was replaced with a new addition which houses the existing lounge and gaming area.

The hotel has 45 electronic gaming machines (EGMs) allowed under Planning Permit 266/96.

Surrounding Area

The surrounding area is located within the Malvern Major Activity Centre which comprises a vast mix of land uses and activities, and a range of building styles and heights. Immediately to the north is a 3 storey office building, and to the east the site abuts two storey commercial buildings within the Heritage Overlay 349. A three storey commercial building is located on the opposite western corner of Dandenong Road and Glenferrie Road, and a row of two storey shop buildings abut the western side of Glenferrie Road and are included in the Heritage Overlay 349.


Malvern Train Station and the rail reserve is located adjacent to the sites northern boundary. Commercial buildings within the Business 1 and 2 Zones and Heritage Overlay 349 extend along Station Street and Claremont Avenue, with the closest residential property in the Residential 1 Zone (within the City of Stonnington) located over 100m away as the crow flies in Chandlers Road, on the northern side of the train tracks. A survey conducted by Hotel staff indicates that there may be dwellings above shops at various properties in Station Street and Glenferrie Road.

The south side of Dandenong Road is located within Glen Eira City Council. A range of mixed use buildings, including a Church, commercial and residential properties are located along this section of Dandenong Road. The land is zoned Business 1 and Residential 1.

There are no other Hotel, Tavern, Nightclub uses proximate to the site.

Previous Planning Application(s)

A search of Council records indicates there are a number of historical planning applications for the subject site, none of which are particularly relevant to the assessment of this application. The range of application types includes alterations and additions, signage and gaming machines. All historical planning permits have been reviewed and there are no relevant permit conditions that would be affected by the proposal.

The Title

The site is described on Certificates of Title as follows:

Lot 1 on Title Plan 244973H (Volume 05611 Folio 156)Land in Plan of Consolidation 151612 (Volume 09981 Folio 922)

No covenants or easements affect the land.

Planning Controls

The following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:

Zone

Clause 34.01 – Business 2 ZonePursuant to Clause 34.02-4 a permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry out works.

Overlay(s)

Clause 43.01 - Heritage Overlay 403Pursuant to Clause 43.01-1 a permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry out works, to demolish or remove a building, externally alter a building by structural work, rendering, sandblasting or in any other way and to construct or display a sign.

Particular Provisions

Clause 52.05 – Advertising Signage

Pursuant to Clause 52.05, a permit is required for Business Identification Signage totalling 8m2 for sites in the Business 2 Zone. The proposed signage falls under this 8m2 limit and the signs do not meet any other signage definition listed in Clause 73.


As such, a permit is not required under the Advertising Signage provisions at Clause 52.05.

Clause 52.06 – Car Parking

Pursuant to Clause 52.06-2, prior to the floor or site area of an existing use being increased the car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided on the land or in accordance with a permit issued under Clause 52.06-3.

Pursuant to Clause 52.06-3 a permit may be granted to reduce (including reduce to zero) the requirement to provide the number of car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5.

Pursuant to Clause 52.06-5 Table 1 sets out the number of car parking spaces required for a use. Where the measure in Column C of Table 1 for an existing use is increased, the car parking requirement only applies to the increase of use provided the existing number of car parking spaces is not reduced.

A Hotel requires a rate of 0.4 car spaces to each patron catered for. The proposal results in a statutory requirement for 112 car spaces for an increase of 280 patrons.

Clause 52.27 – Licensed Premises

A permit is required if the area where liquor is allowed to be consumed or supplied under a licence is to be increased and the number of patrons is to be increased.

An application must be referred and notice of the application must be given in accordance with Clause 66 of this scheme. Pursuant to Clause 66.03, an application in association with a hotel, tavern or nightclub that is to operate after 1am must be referred to the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation.

Clause 52.28 – Gaming

A permit is required to install or use a gaming machine. This does not apply if the gaming machine is in an approved venue under the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 on 18 October 2006 and the maximum number of gaming machines for the approved venue on 18 October 2006 is not exceeded.

The number of gaming machines is not proposed to be increased, thus no permit is required under these provisions.

Clause 52.34 – Bicycle Parking

A new use must not commence or the floor area of an existing use must not be increased until the required bicycle facilities and associated signage has been provided on the land.

Pursuant to Clause 52.34-3, a Hotel requires the following rates:

Employee - 1 to each 25 sq m of bar floor area available to the public, plus 1 to each 100 sq m of lounge floor area available to the public.

Visitor - 1 to each 25 sq m of bar floor area available to the public, plus 1 to each 100 sq m of lounge floor area available to the public

The proposal does not involve any increase in floor area, thus a permit is not required pursuant to Clause 52.34.



The State Planning Policy Framework:Clause 11.01 Activity CentresClause 13.04 Noise AbatementClause 15.01-1 Urban DesignClause 15.01-5 Cultural Identify and Neighbourhood CharacterClause 15.02 Sustainable DevelopmentClause 15.03 Heritage

Municipal Strategic Statement:Clause 21.02 Settlement and Environment

Local Planning Policy Framework:Clause 22.02 Urban Design PolicyClause 22.04 Heritage PolicyClause 22.06 Neighbourhood Character, Amenity and Interface PolicyClause 22.09 Retail Centres PolicyClause 22.10 Licensed Premises Policy

City of Stonnington Heritage Guidelines 2002

Advertising

The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land and by placing two signs on the site. The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily.

The site is located in South Ward and objections from four (4) different properties and VicTrack have been received, and are summarised as follows:

Adverse impact on local residential streets. Loss of amenity and impact on quite suburban streets from drunk and disorderly patrons. Lack of parking for patrons and impact on residential streets. Traffic congestion. Increase in noise from increase of patrons, courtyard and capacity for functions. Impact on tram stop and Malvern Station. Direct impacts on Glenferrie Road, North Caulfield from patrons leaving the venue creating

noise and car parking in street. City of Glen Eira residents will be affected but the decision is being made by the City of

Stonnington. Overdevelopment and over-use. Impact on building occupants at 2-6 Glenferrie Road from noise and air pollution generated by

new courtyard. VicTrack does not object to the granting of a planning permit, but given the proximity to the

railway reserve, suggest conditions/notes be attached to a planning permit. They acknowledge no buildings or works are proposed along or adjacent to the common boundary of VicTrack Land.

It is not considered necessary to include VicTrack’s suggested conditions on the permit given the location and extent of the buildings and works are sufficiently removed and setback from the railway reserve. Moreover, VicTrack are not a statutory referral authority. A copy of the letter from VicTrack has been provided to the Permit Applicant for their reference.


Referrals

Heritage

The current application seeks to demolish modern additions to the side and rear of the hotel in order to construct single storey additions containing new gaming and restaurant facilities. Works to the heritage façade are mainly limited to the removal of modern signage, repainting and the replacement of some (non-original) door and window joinery. A new glazed tile dado is also proposed for the hotel facade.

The proposed tile dado is consistent with the interwar character of the subject building, and hotels of the era more generally. The original architect's drawings for the hotel of 1926 are held in the Stonnington History centre. The drawings do not specify materials and finishes but appear to show a green coloured tile dado on both street frontages. The proposed blue glazed tiles are an acceptable substitute.

The removal of existing visually intrusive modern signage is to be commended but it is not clear if any replacement signage is proposed for the hotel facade.

The proposal to use sandblasting to remove paint from brickwork raises concerns. Sandblasting damages the surface of brickwork allowing moisture penetration. More appropriate techniques for paint removal are outlined in the Stonnington heritage guidelines:

"Removal of paint from surfaces which were not originally intended to be painted is encouraged, but only when an approved technique is to be employed. Note that sandblasting is not considered an appropriate means of paint removal for any but the hardest stone surfaces (eg basalt). A combination of chemical paint stripper and water under medium pressure is most commonly employed, with provision made for collection of waste materials."

The applicant should be encouraged to seek further advice from a contractor with experience in removing paint from heritage buildings.

Corporate and Community Planning

Effects on local amenity may include noise from music and from patrons in the new courtyards and patrons queuing for entry or leaving the venue en masse when functions end.

The submitted acoustic report predicts voice noise levels based on the courtyard being at capacity, and recommends closing the western end of the courtyard at 1am to give sufficient noise attenuation for the closest potential dwellings.

Considering the commercial nature of the area and the distance from residences, it is believed the impact of increased numbers could be mitigated by Noise and Amenity Action Plan conditions as recommended in the Burton acoustic report.

Within 500 metres of the site, there are 30 licenses, including the subject site. Most venues operate as restaurants and cafes with ordinary trading hours. There are three venues closing at 1am, but two of these operate as restaurants.


Because the venue already exists, with unchanged hours, this proposal is not expected to have a negative impact on the character of venue types in the area. If anything, the addition of an outdoor courtyard open to Glenferrie Rd may activate the frontage, providing a greater feeling of safety for pedestrians, as long as patrons are responsibly managed. Similarly, the deletion of the bottle shop will mean less traffic through the premises car park, and possibly increase pedestrian safety.

The area is not a congregation spot and does not have a high number of patrons on the street at night. The proposal may provide a benefit by creating a more active street frontage between the western courtyard and Glenferrie Road.

The venue is defined as a source of potential harm having regard to Council’s Saturation Policy. However, the venue includes a number of features that counteract its status as a source of potential harm. These include a good ratio of seating to standing areas, according to the plan. In addition, much of the red line increase is in the new courtyard, where dining will be a feature. The area is not a congregation spot and not in the premises-saturated Chapel Street entertainment precinct, both conditions shown by research to exacerbate the potential for harm.

The demolition of the 24-hour, drive through bottle shop will lead to more controlled and contained consumption of alcohol. Alcohol can still be purchased over the bar for consumption off premises, but the lost convenience of the 24-hour drive through will reduce consumption.

Police indicated there have been no problems with this venue in the past. They negotiated with the applicant for the inclusion of courtyard conditions and 700 patrons being limited to pre-booked functions.

Based on consideration of the potential harm and mitigating factors, it is recommended that this application be approved with the following conditions:

Internal Music When background music is played in the hotel, windows and doors must be closed at 3am. When music is played at elevated levels (i.e. background music levels plus 15dB from duos

or similar) windows and doors must be closed at 3am. A noise limiter must be used in both internal and external amplification system limiting the

noise levels as specified in the Acoustic Report. All music including live music must be played through the in-house amplification system. When music, other than background music, is played in the hotel, windows and doors must

be closed at 11pm.

Courtyard Music Multiple speakers with low amplification broadly distributed and directed down towards

patrons to be used. Music at elevated levels (i.e. background music levels plus 15dB from duos or similar) only to

be provided in the central part of the courtyard accessed from the dining area and public bar (i.e. north of the bar, between the Dining Room and Public Bar).

Music at elevated levels (i.e. background music levels plus 15dB from duos or similar only) to cease at 1am on weekdays and 1am on weekends.

A noise limiter must be used in the amplification system to limit the noise levels as specified in the Acoustic Report.

The western part of the courtyard accessed from the dining area and public bar must be closed at 1am on weekdays and 1am on weekends (the courtyard patron limit should be decreased at this time to account for the closing of the western portion).


General In addition to the existing security conditions, for pre-booked functions of over 420, a security

guard is required to monitor the parking area from 12 midnight to 30 minutes after the function(s) ends.

Install a CCTV camera to show activity in the car park. Licensed premises staff to clear up litter within 20 metres around the hotel after closing. All new external glazing to be double-glazed to prevent noise transmission. The courtyard accessed from the dining area and public bar to have a defined smoking area,

with the majority of the courtyard being non-smoking (and appropriately signed). The licensee/operator to join and participate in the Stonnington Liquor Accord

Compliance and Response

There are three other licensed premises within a 100 metre radius of the premises and these are restaurants. This proposal will not create a cluster as there is only 3 other licensed premises which are very small low key restaurants. As the Angel Hotel is the only premises of its kind in the vicinity a cluster does not exist.

There is some risk for noise impact however this will be eliminated if the recommendations of the Burton Acoustic Group is implemented and all recommendations are complied with and included as a condition on the Planning Permit.

There will be no congregation impacts due to the 24hr operation. The proposal will not affect movement of patrons as there is no other like venue in the vicinity. I am not aware of any queuing arrangements for the area and have not observed any.

It is not expected that there will be spillage into the street due to the around the clock nature of the business operation.

Waste

There are no current issues or concerns regarding street litter in the vicinity of the subject site. It is believed the proposed changes to the subject site are unlikely to create any new litter issues.

Transport and Parking

Car parking Usage Number/Area Rate Required SpacesHotel 280 patrons 0.4 spaces per patron 112

Empirical Assessment – TTM AnalysisUsage Number/Area Rate Required SpacesHotel 280 patrons 0.22 spaces per patron 62

The proposal includes an increase of one (1) parking space as a result of a redesign of the parking area at the rear of the hotel, which represents a parking shortfall of 111 spaces from the requirements of the Planning Scheme and this raises significant concerns. The content of the submitted Traffic Report also raises concerns.


If the Council accepts the reduced rate of parking as a result of the modal split surveys completed by TTM, the applicant should at the very least provide sufficient parking to cater for the vehicle demand they themselves have calculated. Notwithstanding this, the Transport and Parking Unit is prepared to accept some reduction in parking, but not as proposed.

The following must be addressed:

The increased patronage may not significantly alter the loading arrangements, however the applicant is to confirm the loading arrangements, as the redesign of the parking area may have an impact on the existing loading arrangements.

The proposed parking aisle is to be extended 1m past parking bays 15 and 16 as per the Australian Standards, to ensure access and egress can be provided in a reasonable number of movements. Vehicle movements may occur over the title boundary and the future development of the neighbouring site cannot be controlled by the Applicant. All parking bays must be accessed adequately from within the subject property boundaries. Alternatively, turning templates may be provided to demonstrate that vehicles can access and egress these parking spaces in a reasonable number of movements, in support of the current design.

Wheel stops may be required at the end of parking bays 01 to 10, and 36 to 46, to prevent vehicle intrusion into the pedestrian path and neighbouring property respectively.

The plans submitted do not detail the proposed floor gradients of the parking area, although a “fall” is labelled on the plan. The minimum gradient of the parking area shall be 1 in 100 (1.0%) for outdoor areas and 1 in 200 (0.5%) for covered areas to allow for adequate drainage as per AS2890.1.

The shared area between the disabled bays must include a bollard, to conform to the requirements of the Australian Standards.

The proposal is to utilise an existing vehicle crossing, however it is noted that new landscaping is proposed at the property boundary. The applicant is to clearly show the sight distance triangles as per the below diagram, and ensure that any landscaping or built form within the triangles is limited to 1m in height.

The redundant vehicle crossing is to be removed in accordance with Council requirements.

Bicycle ParkingUsage Number/Area Rate Required SpacesHotel

(Employee) 187m2 1 space per 100m2 of lounge floor area 2

Hotel (Visitor) 187m2 1 space per 100m2 of lounge floor area 2

Total Spaces Required 4

The plans are not clearly dimensioned to indicate that the bicycle parking requirements of the Australian Standards are met. The applicant is to also dimension the narrow points on the designated route from the property access point to the bicycle parking area to ensure that the minimum requirements are met.


The Planning Scheme requires employee bicycle spaces to be provided within a bicycle locker or at a bicycle rail in a lockable compound. A bicycle space for a visitor must be provided at a bicycle rail. The employee spaces do not appear to be located within a lockable compound.

Infrastructure

There are no apparent Infrastructure related issues or concerns with the proposal.

Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation (VCGLR)

The VCGLR did not object to the granting of a planning permit but requested that Council advise the Applicant that their decision made under S 56(1) of the Act may inform, but is not determinative of, any decision the VCGLR may make pursuant to the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998 in respect of the Applicant’s liquor application.

KEY ISSUES

Buildings and Works / Heritage

The proposed buildings and works are triggered under the provisions of the Business 2 Zone and Heritage Overlay (HO403). Council’s Heritage Guidelines state additions should generally be concealed from views within the street, or should be of low visual impact if partly visible. External additions to graded buildings should not impair the legibility of the place or its streetscape, and should preferably not be visible from views within the key streetscape or that address the key streetscape, nor from nearby streets or public places.

The proposal seeks to demolish existing single storey later additions to the building on the northern side, the existing bottle shop and drive through, and the single storey addition fronting Glenferrie Road. The original building will generally be retained. The proposed additions to the existing two storey Interwar Hotel building are single storey to the east side, with a frontage to Dandenong Road, and new entry gates and fencing for entry into the courtyard from Glenferrie Road to the north and west side of the building. The visible additions are contemporary and restrained, and will not impact on the significance of the existing heritage place. Furthermore, Council’s Heritage Advisor has offered no objection to the proposal other than the proposal to remove paint by sandblasting to the northern elevation (rear) of the existing building where facing the proposed courtyard. Sandblasting is not an appropriate technique for paint removal as it compromises the integrity of the brickwork. A condition of any permit issued would require that the elevation plans and legend is amended so that the reference to sandblasting is amended to another technique of paint removal to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Council’s Heritage guidelines provide guidance. In addition the annotation on the north elevation is MR-02 which is not referenced in the legend and appears to be an error. The recommended condition will also rectify this.

The minor alterations and additions to the existing facade include the provision of new doors and windows. These changes are considered to be minor and would not compromise the significance of the existing A2 graded building. All existing signage is to be removed and the proposed repainting (no permit required) of the facade and reinstatement of a tile dado, are considered to improve the appearance of the existing building and are complimentary to the original character of the Interwar building. All additions to the rear, including new canopies and awnings, are light weight in construction and are an appropriate introduction to the site.

It is noted two signage locations have been nominated on the south and east elevations of the proposed single storey extension to the east side of the building. Signage is to future detail, however is limited in size and would have no impact on the heritage place. A note on the permit will ensure that no signage can be displayed without further planning permission.


Variation to Liquor Licence / Amenity

The existing Hotel occupies a two storey and part single storey building, and a bottle shop with drive though to the east side with access from Dandenong Road. The hotel enjoys existing use rights and operates with a general late night 24 hour licence, 10 am to 7am the following day on Sundays, Good Friday and Anzac Day between 12 noon and 1 a.m. the following morning. Liquor can be consumed on and off the premises. The existing red line area where liquor is allowed to be consumed or supplied extends around the perimeter of the existing building. It is proposed to extend this area by approximately 50m² to the north-west corner where a section of the new courtyard is proposed, and the entry/exit point to Glenferrie Road. The extension of the red line area is considered to be minor. Rather the proposed new layout and courtyard are more significant considerations. It is noted the existing gaming machines will be relocated to a new area and room within the new extended part of the Hotel, but it is not proposed to increase the number of gaming machines. Thus, gaming does not form part of the considerations for the application.

The intensification of the use will be assessed having regard to the relevant objectives, policy and provisions of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, and with the acknowledgement of the statement of policy released in the Victorian Government Gazette of 18 March 2011, which placed a freeze on new or extended licenses within the four inner city Municipalities, including Stonnington. The Commission will not grant licenses that seek to trade past 1am, unless the applicant can show exceptional circumstances. It is noted that ‘exceptional circumstances’ is not defined by the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998, each case is considered on its own merit.

It is proposed to increase the patrons numbers from 420 to 575, unless there is a ‘pre-booked’ function where the patrons numbers will be capped at 700. It is not proposed to alter the hours of operation, however it is proposed to have a maximum of 200 patrons in the proposed courtyard accessed from the dining area and public bar with operation ceasing at 1am on any given day.

It is policy pursuant to Clause 22.10 that the preferred location for licensed trading after 11.00pm is in principal and major activity centres. Furthermore, trading after 11.00pm is discouraged adjacent to residential uses, unless the Responsible Authority is satisfied there will be no unreasonable amenity impacts. The expansion of the existing venue must be able to effectively manage amenity conflicts, contribute to an appropriate mix of licensed premises in the activity centre, and to achieve good venue design. The subject site does not have a direct abuttal to a Residential Zone or residential land use, however the land on the south side of the Dandenong Road within the Glen Eira City Council is zoned Business 1 and Residential 1. The closest residential zone within the City of Stonnington is over 100m away “as the crow flies” in Chandlers Road, on the northern side of the train tracks.

Historically, the existing Hotel had a courtyard catering to 130 patrons, which is specified on the existing liquor licence. The submitted acoustic report considers the implications of the proposed new courtyard and its location. The location of the courtyard to the north side of the building will limit noise impacts to the residential area on the south side of Dandenong Road, given the acoustic barrier that the hotel building itself will provide.

In relation to patron noise, there are no legislative controls or noise guidelines to assess patron noise in outdoor areas, and the type of patron noise depends on the type of venue, for example, whether they serve food, the demographic for what occasion people attend. It is a risk assessment, and the submitted acoustic report has had regard to these potential scenarios. The Acoustic report recommends that the western courtyard, adjacent to Glenferrie Road and adjacent to the internal public bar, should be closed at 1am to ensure noise from patrons meets sleep arousal criteria at the closest assumed dwelling (27 Glenferrie Road).


The report advises that the shielding of the three storey office building to the north and the distance and attenuation to the north east are sufficient to reduce patron noise to the recommended limits without any precautions. Notwithstanding this, the Applicant has advised that they will accept a permit condition requiring the whole courtyard that is accessed from the dining area and public bar to be closed by 1am. After this time, liquor must only be supplied and consumed within the internal areas of the premises and the gaming courtyard. However, it is considered the courtyard should remain open for the provision of smoking which is a preferred location than outside the venue on the footpath of Glenferrie Road or Dandenong Road where conflicts are most likely to occur. If alcohol is not available and cannot be consumed in this area, people are likely to stay only a short time. A condition of any permit issued would require that the external courtyard, accessed from the dining area and public bar closes at 1am for the supply and consumption of liquor but remain open for smoking with the exception of the western most deck area (nominated in the Burton Acoustic Report).

The Burton Acoustic report concludes that when music is played in any of the Hotel courtyards at background noise levels, the SEPP N-2 Noise Limits are achieved at the closest potential dwelling at 3am without any precautions. It is recommended that multiple speakers be used at low amplification and distributed within the spaces and speakers should be directed down towards the patrons. The report further recommends that when music is played at elevated levels at night (assumed to be background music levels plus 15 dB), the SEPP N-2 Noise Limits are achieved at the closest potential dwelling with the following precautions:

Music at the elevated level to only be provided in the central courtyard (north of the Bar between the Dining Room and Public Bar).

Music at elevated levels to cease at 1 am. A noise limiter in the amplification system that limits the level of amplification to specified

music noise levels.

Conditions of any permit issued will ensure speakers are distributed throughout the courtyard and directed down towards patrons, and that elevated music is restricted to the central area of the courtyard and ceases at 1am.

Overall, the proposed hours of operation for the new courtyard that is to be accessed from the public bar and dining area, having a closing time of 1am, is considered to be acceptable. This is supported by the fact that the venue is existing and the transformation of the venue design will be the subject of conditions to address changed operational patterns.

The internal modification of the existing building and the new internal area seeks to provide a focus on seating, transforming the Hotel to a food focused venue. The venue design for the reconfigured ground floor level is a positive aspect of the proposal as it can reduce risks of aggression associated with ‘vertical’ drinking. The layout will include a large central kitchen and dining area, lounge bar and public bar, all of which show a concentrated provision of tables and chairs and seating. The proposed courtyard that is accessed from the dining area and public bar is also laid out to have predominantly seating with less standing room.

The site is located on the edge of the Glenferrie Road Major Activity Centre, and the Hotel is the only venue of its kind within the general area. It is considered the proposal will improve the current operations of the hotel and subject to conditions controlling the courtyard and patron numbers, and the adoption of acoustic recommendations, the operation of the licensed premise will have limited impacts on the amenity of the area, particularly having regard to the existing use.

It is State policy at Clause 13.04 to ensure development is not prejudiced and community amenity is not reduced by noise emissions, using a range of building design, urban design and land use separation techniques as appropriate to the land use functions and character of the area.


The report prepared by Burton Acoustic Group considers the proposal and testing has been undertaken outside the nearest residential properties, noting these properties are located within the Business Zone. The Applicant has advised that no dance floor is proposed, as the plans indicate, and that music will be limited to background or acoustic duos. The Acoustic report recommends that SEPP N-2 would be met when measured from the closest residential properties (27 Glenferrie Road – 55m away in the Business 2 Zone) if music is played at background levels with the windows and doors open or at elevated levels (background music levels plus 15 dB e.g. acoustic duos) with the doors and windows to the Hotel closed at 3am. Notwithstanding this, the report recommends that any live music should be played through an in-house amplification system, and doors and windows should be shut (save for the passage of patrons) at 11pm when elevated music is played. This will be required as a condition on any permit issued.

Residential uses within a business zone must accept a lower level of amenity than those that are located within a residential zone. Furthermore, of relevance is the ‘agent of change principle’. Residential development in and around activity centres has increased and will continue to increase, and conflict between residential and other land uses, including entertainment land uses, sometimes emerge as a consequence of these changes. An integrated approach is required to ensure entertainment and residential land uses can co-exist. The agent of change principle determines responsibility for noise management. For an existing venue operator, new residential development should not lead to new compliance costs for the existing land use. For an existing resident, continued protection of amenity should be maintained in the event of a change to an existing venue’s operation.

The internal modification of the venue with a focus on food and seating, will improve the existing operations of the Hotel, particularly having regard to the acoustic recommendations whereby music noise levels can be controlled by conditions of any permit issued. Currently there are no planning permits for the site which specifically control music and patron noise. The proposed new courtyard has been located so as to minimise potential impacts on residential amenity. The Hotel building acts as an acoustic buffer to the residential area to the south in Glen Eira and the three storey office building to the north also acts as a similar buffer together with distance from the residential area to the north-east. Given the use operates with a 24 hour licence, noise from patrons leaving the venue will not be concentrated at any one time. Council’s Corporate and Community Planning department has recommended that a security guard monitor the parking area from 12 midnight to 30 minutes after a pre-booked function ends when patron numbers exceed 420. This will assist in controlling patrons and associated noise. A condition of any permit issued will be to this effect, however the condition should relate to the additional patrons allowed for pre-booked functions, over 575.

Given the uncertainty surrounding the amount of pre-booked functions with 700 patrons that may occur each year, the applicant has offered to cap the number of pre-booked functions where there is a total of 700 patrons, to a maximum of 12 per annum. A condition will be placed on any permit issued restricting this aspect. The pre-booked functions with a total of 575 patrons will not be restricted.

The ‘exceptional circumstance’, referred to in the relevant statement of policy released in the Victorian Government Gazette of 18 March 2011, to allow for an increase in patron numbers from 420 to 575 or 700 for a pre-booked function relies on a number of factors including; that the venue is existing, that is it being internally modified to have an improved venue design with a focus around food, and that there are no historical or existing issues with the venue as advised by Council’s Compliance and Response Department and the Victorian Police. Moreover, the site is not located within Stonnington’s study area for sources of potential harm, is located on the edge of a Major Activity Centre and in the Business 2 Zone, and is abutted by and surrounded by Business Zones where these types of uses are encouraged.


Furthermore, the site abuts a busy train line and one of Melbourne’s busiest main arterial Roads, which has 10 lanes of traffic at this intersection.

There has been a growing awareness of the impact of the clustering of many licensed venues together and the collective impact that this can have on the amenity of neighbourhoods. In considering cumulative impact, considerations should include what an area is like, what is the behaviour of people, what other approvals exist and what types of venue, and what would happen if the proposal was approved. Consideration also includes the density of licensed premises, mix of venue types, how the proposal relates to broader policies for the area, where do patrons travel/pass and whether there are any precinct issues.

The existing Angel Hotel is the only venue type of its kind within the area. Given that there are no other late night licences or Hotel, Tavern, Nightclub or Bar uses within the area, a cluster does not exist and there will be no impacts from patrons travelling from one venue to another. The proposal seeks to transform the Hotel to focus around food and seating. As such the proposal could be seen as a positive given it would enhance the vitality of the area and increase consumer choice. The negative cumulative impacts are associated with noise from increased patrons and a new external area. Although the proposal creates a new impact, that impact when balanced against the positive impacts, Council’s policy direction, the improved venue design, and mitigation measures for noise, the proposal is considered to be acceptable subject to conditions on any permit issued. Furthermore, the Hotel has previously had a courtyard catering to 130 persons.

The Applicant has submitted a Noise and Amenity Action Plan (NAAP), which generally details the requirements as relevant in Clause 22.10. The NAAP however is limited in detailing the noise implications and proposed acoustic arrangements. An amended NAAP or Venue Management Plan will be required to obtain more detail that will assist with the management of the extended use. This will also include patron management recommendations from Council’s Corporate and Community Planning department.

Traffic and Parking

Pursuant to Clause 52.06, a Hotel requires a rate of 0.4 car spaces to each patron. The increase of patron numbers from 420 to 700 results in a statutory requirement to provide 112 car spaces. One additional car space is proposed, thus the shortfall is 111 car spaces. Council’s Traffic Engineer’s do not support the proposed shortfall and have concerns with the assessment undertaken by TTM Consulting Pty Ltd.

Notwithstanding this, the existing provision of 45 car spaces on site and the proposal to increase this to 46, is a substantial provision having regard to the sites location and comparable venues in Metropolitan Melbourne. The revised car parking layout and continued provision of car parking will ensure patrons utilise the car parking on site. If additional car parking was proposed, it would encourage more people to drive to the site which is undesirable. The site is well serviced by a range of public transport modes including direct access to Malvern Train Station and tram services, which also encourages patrons to utilise sustainable transport nodes in line with Council’s Sustainable Transport Policy. Subsequently, given the site is separated from the residential area to the south by a 10 lane arterial road and the residential area to the north by a train line and commercial precinct, patrons are not likely to park in surrounding residential streets due to the ‘out of the way’ locations of these areas.

Overall, the proposed reduction in statutory car parking requirements is supported on the basis of the provision of 46 on site car spaces, public transport availability and the nature of the use.


Council’s Traffic Engineers have advised access to parking bays 15 and 16 may be difficult. The Applicant’s Traffic Engineer has provided swept path diagrams to demonstrate that access to these spaces is possible in single movements or two movements if necessary which is commonplace in public car parks.

With regard to loading, there are no existing formal loading arrangements for the Hotel. The Applicant has advised that loading generally occurs on site during the morning when the car park occupancy level is low. It is proposed to operate in the same manner however the Applicant has advised that car space 15 can be used as a loading area and further line markings can be painted to this effect. The dimensions of this area would be 4.184m and 7.6m which exceeds the requirements of Clause 52.07. It is considered these arrangements are satisfactory given the loading area would be confined on site. A condition of any permit issued would require that an informal loading bay is marked out generally in accordance with the TTM Consulting Pty Ltd drawing No. 741902 sheet No. 4 Council date stamped 30 January 2013.

Conditions of any permit issued will require the following in accordance with Council’s Traffic Engineer’s recommendations:

Wheel stops at the end of parking bays 01 to 10, and 36 to 46, to prevent vehicle intrusion into the pedestrian path and neighbouring property respectively.

The shared area between the disabled bays to include a bollard, to conform to the requirements of the Australian Standards.

The redundant vehicle crossing is to be removed in accordance with Council requirements.

The existing surface levels of the car park would not be altered, rather the car park will be line-marked. In addition, the existing hedge either side of the existing vehicle crossover would be maintained, and this hedge reaches a height of over 1.7m. Thus, given these existing conditions will not be altered it would be onerous to require any changes. Furthermore, the existing hedge provides a suitable green interface to Dandenong Road that reduces the visual impact of the at grade car park. .

The plans do not dimension bicycle parking, as such a condition on any permit issued will require that bike spaces are dimensioned to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.



CONCLUSION

Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended that the proposal be supported subject to conditions of permit for the following reasons:

The hotel use of the land is existing, and the proposal provides positive changes. The negative impacts in relation to noise and residential amenity can be addressed through

permit conditions. The relevant policy of the Stonnington Planning Scheme nominates the site’s location as a

preferred for the type of use proposed.


RECOMMENDATION

That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 428/12 for the land located at 641-651 Dandenong Road, Malvern be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for part demolition, buildings and works to an existing Hotel in a Business 2 Zone and Heritage Overlay, and a subsequent variation to the existing liquor licence to increase patron numbers and increase the area where liquor is allowed to be consumed or supplied, advertising signage, and a reduction in the number of car spaces required subject to the following conditions:

1. Before the commencement of the use and development, three (3) copies of plans drawn to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the advertised plans (advertised December 2012) submitted with the application but modified to show:

a) Deleted reference to sandblasting of existing brickwork to a more sympathetic technique to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. E.g Paint removal with a combination of paint stripper and water under medium pressure or similar.

b) The annotation’ MR-02’ on the north elevation drawing should be corrected to MA02 or other relevant reference to correlate with the legend.

c) A line marked loading bay in the location of car space 15, generally in accordance with the TTM Consulting Pty Ltd drawing No. 741902 sheet No. 4 Council date stamped 30 January 2013.

d) Wheel stops at the end of parking bays 01 to 10, and 36 to 46, to prevent vehicle intrusion into the pedestrian path and neighbouring property respectively.

e) The shared area between the disabled bays to include a bollard, to conform to the requirements of the Australian Standards.

f) Sight line triangles must be provided for the existing crossing, demonstrating compliance with the relevant Australian Standard or the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

g) Dimensions and specifications of the bicycle parking to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

2. The plans endorsed to accompany the permit must not be amended without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Prior to the extended areas being opened to the public, an amended Noise and Amenity Action Plan (NAAP) / Venue Management Plan, generally in accordance with the NAAP Council date stamped 5 July 2012, must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. The NAPP or venue management plan must set out the measures to be implemented by the owner to assist in the orderly management of the extended area to limit any impacts of the use on the amenity of the locality. The amended action / management plan must include (but not be limited to):

a) The operator of the premises will participate in the existing Liquor Accords in the City of Stonnington.

b) Emergency Procedure Management plan.


c) Responsible serving of alcohol guidelines and staff responsibilities.d) Management of patron entrance (including queuing) and exit from the premises

and car park.e) Management of the car park.f) Installation of a CCTV camera to show activity in the car park.g) The identification of all noise sources associated with the licensed premise

(including, but not limited to, music noise, external areas allocated for smokers, queuing lines, entries and exits to the premises and courtyards).

h) Hours of operation for all parts of the premise.i) Details of the provision of music including the frequency and hours of

entertainment provided by live bands and DJs.j) The identification of noise sensitive areas including residential uses and

accommodation in close proximity to the licensed premise.k) Measures to be undertaken to address all noise sources identified, including on

and off-site noise attenuation measures having regard to the Burton Acoustic Report dated 14 November 2012 (Council date stamped 18 January 2013).

l) Details of staffing arrangements including numbers and working hours of all security staff.

m) Standard procedures to be undertaken by staff in the event of a complaint by a member of the public, the Victoria Police, an authorised officer of the responsible authority or an officer of the liquor licensing authority.

n) Location of lighting within the boundaries of the site, security lighting outside the licensed premise and any overspill of lighting.

o) Litter control procedures and details of waste management plan including storage and hours of collection for general rubbish and bottles, and delivery times associated with the licensed premise.

p) Details of any measures to work with neighbours or other residents in the immediate area to address complaints and general operational issues.

q) Any other measures to be undertaken to ensure minimal amenity impacts from the licensed premise.

r) Location and operation of air-conditioning, exhaust fan systems and security alarms.

s) Unloading and Loading requirements.

Any amendment of the NAAP or venue management plan must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The permitted use must be conducted in accordance with the provisions of this plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

4. Noise emanating from the subject land must comply with State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Music Noise from Public Premises) No. N-2, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Any works required to ensure and maintain the noise levels from the licensed premises are in compliance with this policy must be completed prior to the commencement of the use or occupation of the site and maintained thereafter, all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

5. Noise emanating from the subject land must not exceed the permissible noise levels when determined in accordance with State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise from Commerce, Industry and Trade) No. N-1, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Any works required to ensure and maintain the noise levels from the licensed premises are in compliance with this policy must be completed prior to the commencement of the use or occupation of the site and maintained thereafter, all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.


6. No more than 575 patrons are permitted on the premises at any one time, except when there is a ‘pre-booked’ function when a maximum of 700 patrons are permitted on the premises. A logbook of the dates, times and number of patrons for these functions must be kept up to date within 24 hours to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The logbook must be available for inspection by the Responsible Authority immediately upon request.

7. No more than two hundred (200) patrons may be accommodated in the external courtyard that is accessed from the dining area and public bar, at any one time.

8. A maximum of 12 pre-booked functions with a total of 700 patrons are permitted per annum.

9. Without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority, the operating hours for the external courtyard that is accessed from the dining area and public bar when liquor can be supplied and consumed will be 7am to 1am the following day, on any given day.

10. The western section of the external courtyard that is accessed from the dining and public bar area, must be closed with no public access after 1am. The remaining area of the external courtyard must be limited to smoking after 1am.

11. Multiple speakers with low amplification must be broadly distributed in the external courtyard that is accessed from the dining area and public bar, and directed downwards towards patrons.

12. Elevated music in the external courtyard accessed from the dining area and public bar must be restricted to the central area to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, and must cease at 1am. A noise limiter must be used limiting the noise levels as specified in the Acoustic Report prepared by Burton Acoustic Group dated 14th November 2012 and Council date stamped 18 January 2013.

13. Music at elevated levels (i.e. background music levels plus 15dB from duos or similar only) to cease at 1am on weekdays and 1am on weekends.

14. When background music is played in the hotel, windows and doors must be closed at 3am until 10am, seven days a week.

15. When music, other than background music, is played at elevated levels in the hotel (i.e. background music levels plus 15dB from acoustic duos or similar) windows and doors to the building must be closed at 11pm until 10am, seven days a week.

16. A noise limiter must be used in both the internal and external amplification system limiting the noise levels as specified in the Acoustic Report prepared by Burton Acoustic Group dated 14th November 2012 and Council date stamped 18 January 2013.

17. All music, including live music, must be played through the in-house amplification system.

18. Any new external glazing to be double-glazed to limit noise transmission.

19. For pre-booked functions when there are over 575 patrons on the premises, a security guard must monitor the parking area from 12 midnight to 30 minutes after the function(s) ends.


20. Licensed premises staff must clear up litter within 20 metres around the hotel after closing of the external courtyard accessed from the dining area and public bar.

21. CCTV information must be made available to Victoria Police at all times when requested.

22. The use hereby permitted shall at all times be conducted in a manner which ensures that the residential amenity of nearby properties is not detrimentally affected to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

23. External lighting must be designed, baffled and located so as to prevent any adverse effect on residential properties to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

24. Prior to occupation of the extended building, any existing vehicular crossing made redundant by the building and works hereby permitted must be broken out and re-instated as standard footpath and kerb and channel at the permit holders cost to the approval and satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

25. Prior to the occupation of the building / commencement of use, the walls on the boundary of the adjoining properties must be cleaned and finished to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

26. Bottles and rubbish must not be removed from the external courtyard accessed from the dining area and public bar between the hours of 1am and 7am the following day.

27. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

a) The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit. b) The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit. c) The use is not commenced within five years of the date of this permit. d) The use is discontinued for a period of two years or more.

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:

This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are obtained.

This property is located in a Heritage Overlay and planning permission may be required to demolish or otherwise externally alter any existing structures. External alterations include paint removal and any other form of decoration and works, but does not include re-painting an already painted surface.

Signs must not be constructed or displayed without further planning permission.

Background music level, in relation to premises, means a level that enables patrons to conduct a conversation at a distance of 600 millimetres without having to raise their voices to a substantial level.

The licensee/operator to join and participate in the Stonnington Liquor Accord.


1.3. PLANNING PERMIT 0600/08 - 241 & 257 TOORAK ROAD & 625 CHAPEL STREET, SOUTH YARRA – S87A AMENDMENT APPLICATION TO VCAT FOR ALTERATIONS TO THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT


PURPOSE

For Council to consider a S87A amendment for an altered building form, increase in the number of storeys (with no overall increase in height to the northern tower), deletion of office building and replaced with dwellings, increase in the number of dwellings from 211 to 486, increase in number of retail/restaurant tenancies from 14 to 16 and decrease in the total area from 4441m² to 2784m², new office/retail of 462m², increase in number of car parking spaces from 496 to 550, increase in number of bicycle spaces from 142 to 170, staging of construction and amendments to permit preamble and conditions at 241 & 257 Toorak Road & 625 Chapel Street, South Yarra.

Executive Summary

Appellant PT Capitol Development Partnership Pty LtdWard: NorthZone: Business 1Overlay: Heritage Overlay 128

Design and Development Overlay 8Incorporated Plan Overlay 3

Appeal No: P281/2013Hearing Date: 3, 4, 5, 11 & 12 June 2013Trigger for referral to Council:

More than 4 Storeys

Number of Objections: 2 Statements of GroundsConsultative Meeting: No Officer Recommendation: Advise VCAT and other interested parties that Council does not

consent to the proposed S87A Amendment Request

BACKGROUND

At its meeting on 10 November 2008 Council determined to issue a Notice of Refusal for a 38 storey building at 241 & 257 Toorak Road & 625 Chapel Street, South Yarra.

Council’s Refusal was appealed by the applicant and nine parties were joined to the appeal.

Planning Permit 600/08 was issued on 3 July 2009 in accordance with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal decision P3297/2008 dated 30 June 2009 for demolition of the existing building, use and development of the land for shops, restaurants, offices, broadcasting and telecommunications equipment, and dwellings and associated car parking dispensation, altered access to a Category 1 Road and public realm works.

On 10 May 2010 a Conservation Analysis was endorsed, satisfying Condition 9 of the Permit.

On 21 January 2011 Condition 1(c) of the Permit was amended in accordance with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal decision P3053/2010 dated 13 January 2011.


On 25 January 2011 plans were endorsed to comply with Conditions 1, 5 and 7 and a concurrent secondary consent amendment was approved. The amendments included the following:

New half basement level that will accommodate 31 car spaces as a result of the decrease in number of spaces provided on Basement Levels 001 and 002, given the modifications to the core size and location. Overall number of spaces remains the same, 496.

Apartment number and layout modified. Increase in dwellings from 204 to 211 and decrease in bedrooms from 442 to 362.

The number, size and location of the retail/restaurant tenancies altered increasing the overall number from 13 to 14 and decreasing the overall area from 4712m² to 4441m².

The tower floor plate reduced in size and 'rotated' towards the north approximately 1m. The setbacks of the tower increased from the south and west and decreased from the east.

Increase in building height by 1.0m. Relocation of the office lobby from Chapel Street to Toorak Road and reducing the size of

the residential lobby size. Deletion of the cantilevered section over Toorak Road of the office building. Relocation of the pool at Level 06 of the residential building from the tower to an enclosed

glass pavilion. A new accessible roof garden on Level 29 above the low rise section of the tower. A new landscaped roof above Level 06 of the office building. Integration of services and structures.

On 29 November 2010, Council was notified by VCAT that a S87A Amendment request had been lodged. These amendments include the following:

Increase in height of the building by 5 levels, 150mm added to the floor to floor levels of 29 to 42 and an increased height in the plant room by 3000mm. The overall height of the building to be 162.75AHDm from 140.4AHDm, 43 storeys (approximately 146m). The additional 5 levels would provide 15 x 3 bedroom dwellings (total 226 dwellings).

A further basement level added to provide 30 additional car parking spaces and storage for the additional dwellings (the total number of car spaces would increase from 496 to 526).

The number of bicycle parking spaces increased from 66 to 70 spaces for the residential component.

The waste storage areas increased to reflect the additional 15 dwellings. The substation and main switch room relocated from the Lower Ground Level to a double

height space between Basement Level 001 and Basement Level 002.

At its meeting on 7 February 2011, Council resolved to not support the amendment application. The reasons related to the increase in height and the increase in car parking numbers.

By Order dated 8 March 2011, the Tribunal ordered that the application not be allowed and no amendments were granted to the Permit.

On 27 April 2011, the plans were amended pursuant to secondary consent and allowed the following modification:

New terraces for the north facing dwellings on Level 07 above the approved pool pavilion.

Currently, the Permit will expire if the development is not commenced within five years of the date of the Permit (3 July 2014).


The Proposal

The plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by Bates Smart and are known as TP01.00 – TP01.02, TP02.00-TP0.207, TP02.07B, TP02.08-TP02.16 and TP02.20-TP02.31 all Revision B dated January 2013 (received by Council 8 February 2013).

Key features of the proposal are:

North building – increase in the number of levels from 38 (plus plant) to 41 (plus plant) – overall height unchanged

North building – parapet height of podium increased from AHD28.00m to AHD28.50m South building – increase in number of levels from 9 (plus plant) to 12 (plus plant) and

increase in height of the building (to the plant) from AHD46.40m to AHD49.00m South building – reduce podium level from AHD30.7m to AHD19.2m South building – delete six office levels (7525m²) and replace with 134 dwellings over nine

levels Increase in number of dwellings over the entire site from 211 to 486 Increase in number of retail/restaurant tenancies from 14 to 16 and decrease the total area

from 4441m² to 3582m² New office/retail 462m² Increase in number of car parking spaces over the entire site from 496 to 550 Increase in number of bicycle spaces from 142 to 170 Modifications to basement and podium parking layouts Building form for both north and south buildings altered Staging of construction proposed Amendments to the permit preamble and conditions

Note: assume retail is multi-purpose i.e. shops and restaurants; and assume office/retail is office.

Site and Surrounds

The site is located on the north-west corner of the intersection of Chapel Street and Toorak Road and has the following significant characteristics:

Approximately 5,600m² in area. Frontages to Toorak Road of 47.5m, Chapel Street of 89.2m and Almeida Crescent of

60.1m. The land also curves at the intersection of Chapel Street and Toorak Road. A fall of approximately 5.8m across the land from the south-west corner to the north-east

corner.

To the north-west of the site is the Forrest Hill Precinct. To the immediate west of the site at 227 Toorak Road was the former ANZ building that is currently under construction. This site now features a 25 storey mixed use building with a height of 89.76AHD. To the north is 627 Chapel Street, a six storey office building. To the east of the site is the ‘Como’ development, containing a number of separate yet interlinked buildings which culminate in the Channel 10 building at 19 storeys in height. To the north of ‘Como’ is 670 Chapel Street, a 31 storey building with a height of 124.7AHD. To the south of the site, along Toorak Road and Chapel Street, development is generally Victorian era shops of between 1 and 3 storeys in height with some contemporary infill development.

The site has excellent access to public transport including South Yarra Railway Station, approximately 230m to the west, and trams along Toorak Road and Chapel Street.The Title


The site is described on the following titles:

Lot 1 on Title Plan 380411R (Vol/Fol: 06141/088) Lot 1 on Title Plan 840745X (Vol/Fol: 09647/067) Lot 1 on Title Plan 185925V (Vol/Fol: 09083/269) Lot 1 on Title Plan 860505G (Vol/Fol: 09500/434) Lot 1 on Title Plan 757433G (Vol/Fol: 08137/988) Lot 1 on Title Plan 148025U (Vol/Fol: 09060/423) Lot 1 on Plan of Subdivision 031609 (Vol/Fol: 08587/463) Lot 2 on Plan of Subdivision 031609 (Vol/Fol: 08212/955)

The titles include a number of restrictions including drainage and party wall easements and a Section 163 Building Act Agreement. The Agreement relates to modifications of the Victorian Building Regulation 1983 and is not relevant to this application.

Planning Controls

This amendment application was lodged with VCAT under Section 87A of the Planning and Environment Act. Section 90A of the Act directs the Tribunal to take into account the relevant Planning Scheme.

Given that the original Planning Permit was issued by VCAT, any amendment to the Planning Permit and significant modifications to the plans need to be determined by VCAT.

This report essentially outlines the view of the Responsible Authority (Council) in an assessment against the relevant provisions of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. Council is required to submit a position on the proposed amendment at VCAT.

The following controls are relevant considerations for this amendment:

Zone

Clause 34.01 – Business 1 ZonePursuant to Clause 34.01-1 a permit is required to use the land for dwellings as the ground floor level frontage exceeds 2 metres in width. No permit is required to use the land as office, shop or restaurant.Pursuant to Clause 34.01-4 a permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry out works.

Overlays

Clause 43.01 – Heritage OverlayPursuant to Clause 43.01 a permit is required for demolition and to construct a building or construct or carry out works.

Clause 43.02 – Design and Development Overlay (Schedule 8)


Pursuant to Clause 43.02-2 a permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry out works. Schedule 8 to the overlay relates to the Forrest Hill Precinct and specifies height and design requirements for the area. Development for the subject site should:

Incorporate a street wall parapet height along Chapel Street and Toorak Road of a minimum of 15m and a maximum of 23m.

Provide up to a 3 metre front setback from the property boundary along Chapel Street.

A preferred maximum building height for this site is not specified.

Particular Provisions

Clause 52.06 – Car Parking

Pursuant to Clause 52.06-2 before a new use commences, the number of car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided to the satisfaction of the responsible authority in one or more of the following ways:

on the land; or in accordance with a permit issued under Clause 52.06-3; or in accordance with a financial contribution requirement specified in a schedule to the Parking

Overlay.

The current approval (211 dwellings (58 x 1 bedroom, 109 x 2 bedroom and 44 x 3 bedroom), 7525m² of office, 4441m² retail/restaurants) provides a total of 496 car parking spaces.

For the additional 275 dwellings (acknowledging there is a decrease in the number of 3 bedroom dwellings), 275 resident spaces and 55 visitor spaces are required. It is noted that the previously approved office component and the associated 125 car spaces is no longer required.

An additional 54 spaces are proposed as part of this amendment.

Overall for 486 dwellings (221 x 1 bedroom, 237 x 2 bedroom and 28 x 3 bedroom) and 3582m² of retail/restaurant, 462m² of office/retail, 458 spaces are required for the 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings, 56 spaces for the 3 bedroom dwellings, 97 spaces for the residential visitors and 143 for the employees and 16 for the office; a total of 770 spaces. The proposal is providing 157 spaces in the southern building and 393 in the northern building; a total of 550 car parking spaces. There is no detail of the proposed allocation of spaces.

Clause 52.34 – Bicycle FacilitiesPursuant to Clause 52.34-1 bicycle facilities should be provided in accordance with the requirements at Clause 52.34-3 and 52.34-4. The current approval (211 dwellings, 7525m² of office, 4441m² retail/restaurants) provides a total of 142 bicycle spaces (68 for dwellings, 56 for office and 18 for visitors on the footpath).

For the additional 275 dwellings, 55 bicycle spaces are required for residents and 28 for visitors.

An additional 28 spaces are proposed within the building. Overall, for 486 dwellings and 3528m² of retail/restaurant and 462m² of office/retail, 97 spaces are required for residents, 49 for residential visitors, 6 for employees and 7 for customers; a total of 159 spaces. The proposal is providing 48 spaces in the southern building, 104 in the northern building and 18 on the footpath for visitors; a total of 170 bicycle spaces.



State Planning Policy Framework:Clause 11 SettlementClause 15 Built Environment and HeritageClause 16.01 Residential DevelopmentClause 17 Economic DevelopmentClause 18.01 Integrated TransportClause 18.02 Movement Networks

Local Planning Policy Framework:Clause 21.02 Settlement and the EnvironmentClause 21.03 HousingClause 21.04 Economic DevelopmentClause 21.05 InfrastructureClause 22.02 Urban Design PolicyClause 22.04 Heritage PolicyClause 22.05 Residential Development in Commercial Areas PolicyClause 22.06 Residential Character, Amenity and Interface PolicyClause 22.09 Retail Centres PolicyClause 22.12 Traffic PolicyClause 22.13 Parking PolicyClause 22.15 Infrastructure PolicyClause 22.17 Forrest Hill Precinct Policy

Amendment C161

This is an update to the existing Local Planning Policy Framework, and includes a new Municipal Strategic Statement, and the deletion of a number of local policies. Of relevance to this application the Urban Design Policy, Residential Development in Commercial Areas Policy, Residential Character, Amenity and Interface Policy, Retail Centres Policy, Traffic Policy and Parking Policy will be deleted.

The amendment has been exhibited, and the Panel report has been recently released. The Panel was generally supportive of the amendment subject to a number of changes. Those changes have recently been considered by Council who have adopted a modified version of the Panel recommendations.

Although the amendment is a major change to the Planning Scheme, it is considered that the principal assessment criteria relating to this application are still largely unchanged given that the site is still situated within a Principal Activity Centre in the existing and proposed Strategic Framework Plan and the Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 8 will remain unchanged.

Notification of Amending Plans

By way of Order dated 18 February 2013, VCAT directed the applicant to undertake the following:

Serve a complete copy of the application, VCAT forms A & B and VCAT order on:

a) The Responsible Authority b) Referral authoritiesc) The Minister for Planningd) The persons named in the applicants list of interested persons


Serve a copy of the application (excluding the attachments), List of changes, Amended Permit, VCAT Forms A & B and VCAT Order on:

a) The owners of:I. 650 Chapel Street

II. The Como Centre, corner of Chapel Street and Toorak Road

b) The owners and occupiers of:i 227-233 Toorak Roadii 627 Chapel Streetiii 637 Chapel Streetiv 2 Daly Streetvi 6-10 Daly Streetvii 9 Daly Streetviii 209 Toorak Roadix The properties on the southern side of Toorak Road between Chambers Street

and Chapel Streetx The property on the south east corner of Chapel Street and Toorak Road

c) Care Park Pty Ltd on behalf of the owners and occupiers of 11-17 Daly Street.

Two (2) Statements of Grounds have been received and they can be summarised as follows:

Design of amended building is not iconic Height Density and overcrowding Height, simplification of form and design of the Toorak Road podium is out of scale and

character with the street and the adjacent building at 227 Toorak Road Western boundary wall should remain a solid concrete wall Overlooking and lack of screening Insufficient details provided regarding the acoustic treatments, side screening and roof

details for the plant room level of the southern building Insufficient details provided to determine whether there is sufficient space or appropriate

view lines for westbound traffic on Almeida Crescent to turn left into 227 Toorak Road

The applicant also advised the Director of Public Transport and VicRoads of the amendment application.

While no response has been received from the Director of Public Transport to date, VicRoads has advised that no objection is raised to the amendment application, provided the following conditions are included in any amended permit:

1. Prior to the commencement of the permitted development, a detailed functional layout drawing, generally in accordance with drawing TP02.03 revision B – Level 00- Lower Ground Level Drawing prepared by Bates Smart, but modified to show the following must be submitted and approved by VicRoads:

a) The access to Almedia Crescent restricted to left in/ left out only. b) Functional layout of the vehicle access to Almedia Crescent from Chapel Street.

The functional layout must include details of physical islands and associated line markings and signage enforcing left in / left out access arrangement.

c) Swept path analysis of appropriate design vehicles entering and exiting the development from Chapel Street.


d) The redundant crossovers on Chapel Street removed and the kerb, channel and footpath reinstated.

2. Prior to the commencement of use of the permitted development, works as shown on the approved functional layout drawing must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

3. Prior to the commencement of use of the permitted development, redundant vehicle crossovers on Chapel Street must be removed and kerb, channel and footpath reinstated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Referrals

Infrastructure

The existing Planning Permit (condition #12) refers to the treatment of public areas, however the required plan referred to suggests that it would be a conceptual/landscape plan and not a formal Engineering (design) plan. Is it possible to expand the condition to require that a plan prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Infrastructure unit and that the required works must be completed in accordance with that plan.

Waste

A Waste Management Plan for the development must be submitted for approval (it is noted that this is already included as a Condition of the Permit). A successful Waste Management Plan will describe how a property’s solid waste stream is managed, and instruct the property’s owners, residents, occupiers, manager/s, and waste collectors of their roles and responsibilities within the waste stream. The successful Waste Management Plan will also articulate how the building is going to contribute toward achieving the waste reduction and diversion targets outlined the Victorian State Government strategy; ‘Sustainability in Action: Toward Zero Waste’. As a final document, the development’s approved Waste Management Plan will be prepared, presented and stored in a manner for easy access and comprehension by all existing and future stakeholders of the development.

The ‘Bin Room’s depicted on the plans are horribly undersized to house the previously calculated standard allocation of bins. Additionally, there is no provision of a ‘Bin Room’ for retail tenements No.s 10 to 16 and back-of-house access must be provided from all retail tenements to a ‘Bin Room’.

Urban Design

The proposed amendment represents a net loss of approximately 7,500sqm of commercial employment space from this major development site, and from the Principal Activity Centre (PAC). This trend of higher-density apartment developments displacing significant amounts of employment space should be strenuously resisted, as it progressively leads to a significant imbalance between housing-density and jobs-density in local areas. The substantively mixed-use nature of the currently approved scheme represents an important ‘in-principle’ benchmark for future developments, of varying scales, within the PAC.

The proposed changes to the form, setbacks and design of the ‘southern building’, above the retail podium, result in an extremely poor streetscape outcome relative to the currently approved scheme.


The currently approved scheme for the scale of the ‘podium’ element of the development (with a parapet height of AHD 31.1m) was intentionally designed to achieve a purposeful streetscape relationship with the (AHD 31.4m) podium parapet height of the ‘Como Centre’ on the east side of Chapel Street. The proposed amendment seeks to reduce the Toorak Road edge of the building to a much lower-scale form with a parapet height of AHD 19.2m and a setback above to the proposed 9-storey apartment block. The consequence of this change is the loss of the important streetscape relationship with the ‘Como” building and a poor streetscape relationship with the scale of the Toorak Road edge of the adjacent ‘ILK’ development to the west.

The amended form of the tower does not possess the unique qualities of the approved design. The Planning Scheme requires a “landmark” design for this important site at the epicentre of South Yarra; and the currently approved scheme achieves that objective. The amended proposal constitutes a poor reflection of the currently approved scheme. The form of the approved tower is unique, comprising the subtle integration of two elliptical forms of unequal height. In contrast, the singular form of the amended tower differs only marginally from the forms of a range of more typical towers found elsewhere; and is therefore not sufficiently distinctive to be regarded as a “landmark” development. Similarly, the approved ‘southern’ office building is also a uniquely sculptural form, whereas the proposed amendment reduces the distinctiveness of this building by adopting a variant on the more typical ‘slab’ building form.

Transport & Parking

Car Parking Provisions

The statutory requirement for the proposed development is 770 spaces (458 spaces for the 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings, 56 for the 3 bedroom dwellings, 97 for the residential visitors, 16 for the office and 143 for the shop). An empirical rate, which is based on the Forrest Hill Precinct rates adopted by Council at its meeting on 7 June 2010 and subject to a Planning Scheme Amendment C139, would require 344 spaces (320 for the dwellings, 8 for the office and 16 for the shops).

Given that a Permit has been granted by VCAT for this site, it could be considered reasonable to apply the parking rates only to the change in use from the permit, and assess whether the difference in parking provided is reasonable. Using this approach, and the empirical Forrest Hill rates, the increase in dwellings from 211 to 486 would permit a maximum parking increase of 179 spaces. The reduction in office from 7525m2 to 462m2 suggests a reduction in maximum parking of 117 spaces from the approved development should be taken. The retail component has been increased from 14 tenancies to 16 tenancies; therefore the maximum parking increase would be two (2) spaces. Taking this into consideration, the maximum increase in parking permitted based on the change of use alone would be 64 spaces. The proposed increase is 54 spaces.

As such, the change may be considered broadly reasonable, however considered holistically the provision of parking appears very high. The impact of the traffic on the network is likely to be considerable.

A detailed parking management plan which clearly shows the allocation of parking bays to each use, and to individual dwellings, must be submitted.

Traffic Generation

Additional information should be provided of any analysis of the impact on the local or arterial road network or intersections. A SIDRA assessment of the intersections nearby should be undertaken by the applicant, as per previous applications for this site.


Advice from the relevant public transport authority is to be obtained in regards to the increased traffic volumes that will attempt to enter Almeida Crescent from Chapel Street in relation to delays to existing services. Also, VicRoads advice on the same matter must be obtained, given the potential impact to traffic conditions along this section of Chapel Street, which is under VicRoads jurisdiction.

Bicycle Facilities

Overall, 159 bicycle spaces would be required for the proposed development (97 for residents, 49 for residential visitors, 6 for shop employees and 7 for shop customers). For the change in use, an additional 28 spaces are proposed. For the proposed usage increase/decrease 49 spaces are required (55 additional resident spaces, 28 additional visitor spaces, 24 less office employee spaces, 7 less officer visitor spaces, 1 less shop employee space and 2 less shop customer spaces). The proposal is providing 170 spaces overall, an increase of 28 spaces. However, this is considered insufficient to cater for the change in use. It is recommended that the applicant cater for the change in use completely by providing 191 bicycle spaces on site (142 + 49 spaces).

All visitor bicycle spaces should be provided on site and not on the Council footpath.

No details have been provided regarding the bicycle parking design. Plans should be revised to show the bicycle provision, the types and all relevant dimensions.

Concerns are held regarding access to the bicycle parking area in the southern building given that it encouraged interaction between bicycles and truck/vans near the loading bay. Visitor parking should be provided in areas which are accessible to the public.

Loading Facilities

Two (2) loading areas have been provided, however these should be dimensioned to confirm whether they can be considered satisfactory. Swept path diagrams should also be submitted to show the turning movements within the loading bay and access to the development from Almeida Crescent and Daly Street.

Parking Facilities

There are a number of concerns raised with the car parking layout, specifically given the lack of detail as shown on the A3 size plans. The summary is as follows:

Parking bays should confirm dimensions and should be in accordance with the Planning Scheme.

Tandem bays should be dimensioned and should be 4.9m long for the first bay and 5.4m long for the second bay.

Column locations should be dimensioned and should be in accordance with the Planning Scheme.

Blind aisles extending 1m beyond the end parking bay have not been provided. These should either be provided or demonstration via a turning template that vehicles can enter and exit in a forwards direction be submitted.

Access to some storage lockers appears to be directly from parking aisles. All storage lockers should be accessed from pedestrian pathways or parking bays where the bay is allocated to the holder of the storage locker.

Proposed floor gradients of the parking areas should be shown. Longitudinal sections should be provided for each ramp which shows all proposed grades,

lengths of grades and all levels to allow for assessment. The width of the ramps should also be shown.


A minimum headroom clearance of 2.2m is to be provided throughout the carpark, measured to the lowest point (with any doors in the open position).

Additional information required regarding the sightlines including details of any structure within the triangles.

The two proposed access points in Almeida Crescent are fairly wide and ultimately form an intersection with Almeida Crescent. Given the narrow nature of Almeida Crescent at its western end, this may raise some operational and safety concerns, which are further exacerbated by the type of traffic likely to access the loading areas. There are major safety concerns associated with the access point to the car park, which most likely will result in the necessity to redesign the access points in order to provide acceptable conditions at all exits. Currently, the proposal is not supported on these grounds. The plans are not dimensioned, however should include all relevant information such as widths and length of all roadways and lanes. As such, revised material is to be submitted showing the relevant information, and in this instance, all the widths of the proposed roadways and lanes.

KEY ISSUES

The changes to the plans are considered in turn below.

Built Form

Design and Development Overlay (Schedule 8) includes the following design objectives for the subject site, Fun Factory Site – 241/257 Toorak Road & 625 Chapel Street:

To reinforce the primary gateway significance of the Fun Factory site to the Forrest Hill Precinct and Prahran South Yarra Principal Activity Centre.

To accommodate an iconic podium-tower development. To ensure the upper levels are designed so as to reduce building mass and bulk and

produce a sculptural and slender building outcome. To provide retail uses and active frontages to revitalise the main street. To avoid an overbearing presence on Toorak Road, Chapel Street and the Forrest Hill

Precinct. To ensure podium levels complement the existing streetscape of the Toorak Road/Chapel

Street intersection and provide a consistent building edge (street wall) along the western side of Chapel Street.

In addition, the design standards require that development should:

Incorporate a street wall parapet height along Chapel Street and Toorak Road of a minimum of 15m and a maximum of 23m.

Provide up to a 3 metre front setback from the property boundary along Chapel Street.

The general design objectives of DDO8 seek to, amongst others, “retain and reinforce coherent gateways, in particular the northern gateway site at 681 & 709 Chapel St and the primary gateway site at 241 – 257 Toorak Rd and 625 Chapel St”, “ensure the street wall of new buildings are parallel to the street alignment so as to create a sense of street enclosure”, “ensure that all development achieves excellence in architecture and urban design” and to “provide tall, slender building forms rather than bulky, monolithic buildings in order to minimise visual bulk”.

The current approval includes a tower that is a well designed, slender element that is of a landmark quality. VCAT, in its Order P3297/2008 that approved the original design, stated the following at paragraph 23:


“This site is earmarked to contain the highest building in the area and, although any permit application would need to be assessed on its merits, the precinct’s built form aims are for the review site to be the primary gateway with other development subservient to it. Moreover, the design objectives are also seeking development on this site that is not monolithic or unreasonably bulky; this is one reason why the design objectives for DDO8 seek a sculptural and slender building outcome. We are satisfied that outcome is achieved in the current design. We are also satisfied that the lower tower achieves a “mid-rise” scale of development that mediates between the podium and tower elements.”

It is considered that the amended building does not possess the qualities of the approved design. The approved design is in two parts that comprises two elliptical forms that intersect and are of unequal height for the northern building and a uniquely sculptural form for the southern building. The proposed building involves a single four leaf clover shape for the tower element and a recessed and altered form for the southern building.

Current Approval Proposed

The tower element, while increasing setbacks to all title boundaries and providing greater separation with the ILK building to the west, is not considered to be of a design that is of a ‘landmark quality’. The approved design, with the varied heights, allowed for a tall and slender form. The proposed tower seeks a wider building (given the altered shape) extending to its maximum approved height. The two varied heights of the tower have been deleted from the design. The combination of this loss and the altered form of the building lends itself to a design that is not considered an iconic podium-tower development or a sculptural and slender building.

The southern tower does not comply with the design objectives or the design standards of DDO8 as the podium level does not complement the existing streetscape of the Toorak Road/Chapel Street intersection and is less than the preferred 15m minimum.

For these reasons, it is considered that the proposed amendment does not comply with the design objective and design standards of Design and Development Overlay 8.

Southern Building

The amendment includes changes to the exterior architecture and altered internal configuration of the both the northern and southern buildings.


It is proposed to delete the office use from the southern building and replace it with dwellings. Six levels of office (approximately 7,525m²) are proposed to be replaced with nine levels of dwellings (134 dwellings) and will include an altered facade treatment given the provision of balconies. The form and height of the building is also proposed to be altered. The replacement of dwellings with office is considered acceptable.

The current approved southern building includes a podium element of 21.4m (AHD30.7m) and an overall height of 33.1m (AHD42.4m). In addition, a roof plant measuring 4m above the overall height was approved at 37.1m (AHD46.4m). The southern building was intentionally designed to achieve a purposeful streetscape relationship with the podium parapet height of the Como Centre on the eastern side of Chapel Street (AHD31.4m).

The proposed amendment seeks to alter the Toorak Road elevation of the southern building by incorporating a setback of approximately 5m above a street wall height of 9.9m (AHD19.2m). The building then rises nine levels to 37.4m (AHD46.1m) with an additional roof plant of 2.9m to 40.3m (AHD49.00m).

The modification to the presentation of the building would result in a loss of the important streetscape relationship with the Como Centre building and the ILK building at 227 Toorak Road (under construction). The Como Centre building has a podium parapet height of AHD31.4m and the ILK building has a podium parapet height of AHD24.61m to the street and an additional podium at AHD40.21m setback approximately 8m from the street.

The building is proposed to increase in overall height by 4.3m as a result of the conversion from office to residential and the increase in storeys. The form of the building, including the setback above the street wall, has no relationship with adjacent buildings. It is considered that the design of the building, including the increase in height, has been altered from a uniquely sculptural form to a more simplistic tower which blurs its distinctiveness. The amendments to the southern building are therefore not supported.

Northern Building

The current approved northern building includes ground level retail, five levels of car parking, a level of residential amenities, 22 levels of residential (low-rise), 9 levels of residential (high-rise) and a plant and roof level. The low-rise section of the building would measure to a height of 98.29m (AHD104.55m) and the high-rise section to a height of 134.14m (AHD140.4m) to the top of the roof level. It is proposed to reduce the floor to floor heights of all residential levels which results in an increase in number of residential levels from 31 to 34. The roof plant level will measure 134.14m (AHD140.4m) and the lift motor room would exceed this height slightly.

The proposed amendment seeks to alter the design of the northern building from the integration of two elliptical forms of unequal height to a singular tower form. The original roof plant was previously integrated into the design of the building where the level was finished identical to the dwelling levels and measured to the roof parapet of AHD140.4m. The proposed amendment seeks a different treatment to the roof plant with a height of AHD140.4m and also includes a lift motor room above this level.

The approved tower includes the lower of the two elliptical forms punctuating the north eastern corner of the site. Hence, up to Level 28 (or AHD103.65m) the building aligns with the podium levels. The taller tower element is setback 10m from the Chapel Street title boundary up to a height of 134.14m (AHD140.4m). The proposed amendment seeks to increase the setbacks from the ILK building from 13.4m to between 23.2m and 24.6m and alter the setbacks from the building to the north from between 12m and 20m to 16.4m.


The proposed amendment also seeks to alter the setbacks from the Chapel Street frontage (not the title) for the entire building to between 2.675m and 4.215m. This would create a wider building closer to Chapel Street. It is considered that this aspect of the proposed amendments would produce a poor urban design outcome for the Chapel Street elevation, and for extended view lines.

The approved design was considered to be an architectural landmark, consistent with the preferred character as specified in Design and Development Overlay 8. The roof plant and lift motor room are no longer integrated into the design of the building. It is considered that the amended building design cannot be regarded as a ‘landmark development’ as it is not sufficiently distinctive from other tower forms found in the Forrest Hill Precinct and elsewhere. The amendments to the northern building are therefore not supported.

Uses

It is proposed to increase the number of dwellings over the site from 211 (58 x 1 bedroom, 109 x 2 bedroom and 44 x 3 bedroom) to 486 (221 x 1 bedroom, 237 x 2 bedroom and 28 x 3 bedroom), increase the number of retail/restaurant tenancies form 14 to 16 and decrease the total area from 4441m² to 2784m² and create a new office/retail tenancy of 462m². For the purposes of car parking and bicycle parking calculations, the new tenancy has been identified as retail. The increase in the number of dwellings and decrease in the retail/restaurant tenancies is considered acceptable and appropriate for the site having regard to the location and existing mixed use character. Clause 22.19 seeks to provide a range of uses that are accessible to all and complement the role of the Activity Centre as a Principal Activity Centre and to accommodate housing growth and diversity by providing a range of housing types. The proposed uses would co-exist harmoniously with surrounding commercial and residential land uses and is consistent with this policy. Furthermore, these uses would be consistent with the strategic direction for this location and policy under Clause 22.09 Retail Centres Policy.

It is noted that Council’s Urban Designer has raised concerns with the deletion of the office use from the southern building. While it would be desirable to retain the six levels of office, there is no policy requirement for this additional commercial use. Hence, there is no policy justification to provide additional commercial uses than what is currently being proposed and as such, the proposed mix of uses is acceptable. The proposal retains a substantial portion of other uses including a significant improvement to the ground level street activation.

Car Parking, Bicycle Facilities and Loading Bays

The current approval includes 496 car parking spaces divided as follows for 211 dwellings, 7525m² of office and 4441m² of retail/restaurants, as per Condition 6 of the Permit:

Current approval (496 spaces)

Not less than 1 space per 1 or 2 bedroom unit Not less than 167 spaces (one per dwelling)

Not less than 2 spaces per 3 or 4 bedroom unit Not less than 88 spaces (two per dwelling)

24 residential visitor spaces 24

125 office spaces 125

Not less than 38 spaces for retail uses Not less than 38

Total 442

Unallocated 54


The proposed development includes 550 car parking spaces for 486 dwellings, 3582m² of retail/restaurant and 462m² of office/retail. The following is a calculation of the statutory rate, the empirical rate as adopted by Council and a comparison to the rate suggested above:

Use Statutory RateEmpirical rate adopted by Council

Comparison rate to table above (as included in Condition 6 of Permit)

1 or 2 bedroom dwelling

458 spaces (221 x 1 bedroom and 237 x 2 bedroom)

320 spaces Not less than 458 (one per dwelling)

3 or 4 bedroom dwelling 56 spaces (28 x 3 bedroom) (included above) Not less than 56 (two per

dwelling)

Residential visitors 97 spaces Nil 55 residential visitor spaces

Office 16 8 7

Retail 143spaces 16 spaces Not less than 30 spaces for retail uses

Total 770 spaces 344 spaces 606

Difference220 spaces undersupplied (770-550)

206 spaces oversupplied (550-344)

56 spaces undersupplied (606-550)

As discussed by Council’s Transport & Parking Unit, given that a Permit has been granted, it is considered reasonable to apply the parking rates only to the change in use from the permit, and assess whether the difference in parking provided is reasonable. Using this approach, and the empirical rates, the increase in dwellings from 211 to 486 would require a maximum parking increase of 179 spaces. The reduction in office from 7525m2 to 462m² suggests a reduction in maximum parking of 117 spaces from the approved development should be taken. The retail component has been increased from 14 tenancies to 16 tenancies; therefore the maximum parking increase would be two (2) spaces. Taking this into consideration, the maximum increase in parking permitted based on the change of use alone would be 64 spaces. The proposed increase is 54 spaces and therefore is considered satisfactory.

However, it should be noted that some visitor parking should be provided on site. Currently 24 spaces are provided for the 211 dwellings and a corresponding increase should be provided for the proposed 486 dwellings.

Further to the above being satisfactory, additional information would be required to assess the impact of the additional vehicle movements on the road network.

Additional bicycle parking should be provided and their locations should be easily identifiable.

The layout of the car parking area, bicycle facilities and the loading bays require additional information for assessment. It is likely that these could be addressed via additional conditions to be included on any amended permit to issue.


Waste

The proposed bin storage areas are considered undersized for the proposed development and as such should be increased in size. In addition, the retail tenancies in the northern building (No.s 10-16) do not have access to a bin storage area that is accessed from the rear of the tenancies. Existing Condition 1(d) refers to the requirement to provide any additional waste storage area as required by Condition 5 (Waste Management Plan). Hence, this condition should be retained as it addresses this concern.

Two Waste Management Plans (one for each building) have already been endorsed for the current scheme. These were endorsed on 25 January 2011. Should the proposed amendments be approved, Condition 5 should be amended to read, “Concurrent with the endorsement of the amended plans...”

Infrastructure

Should the proposed amendments be approved, an additional condition should be included on the Permit requiring a plan for the treatment of the public areas to be prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer and submitted and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Unit and that the required works must be completed in accordance with that plan.

Staged Construction

It is proposed to stage the development of each of building. A preliminary staging plan has been included (see drawing TP01.02) in the set of plans and a number of conditions are proposed to be amended to refer to the different stages of development. Council has concerns regarding the proposed staging of the development given that there appears to be no certainty that the site would be developed in its entirety. In addition, amendments to some conditions are not considered appropriate given that they cannot be separated into different stages of development. For example, the condition that requires entering into a S173 Agreement for the treatment of the public areas and traffic management works in Almeida Crescent need to be undertaken as a whole development. Access and responsibility of works to Almeida Crescent should be undertaken by the site as a whole, not just the northern building. Until sufficient information is provided regarding how staging of the development can be undertaken satisfactorily, Council opposes this aspect of the amendment.

Permit Conditions

It is proposed to amend several permit conditions as they would relate to staging of development. In addition, amendments not relating to staging are also proposed.

For ease of reference, the amendments to Conditions that are of concern will only be discussed. The following concerns are raised with amendment to the existing permit conditions (not the document provided by the applicant):

Staging of the development and all conditions will be fragmented and will not allow the development to include a complete set of documents prior to construction. All endorsed documents should refer to the entire development.

Condition 3 should relate to the entire site, should be submitted and approved concurrent with the endorsement of amended plans and should be amended to refer to the submission of a Sustainable Management Plan (SMP).

Condition 4 should relate to the entire site. Condition 5 should relate to the entire site and should be submitted and approved concurrent

with the endorsement of amended plans.


Condition 6 requiring the endorsement of a Parking Management Plan should not be separated into different stages as it refers to the entire number of car parking spaces and includes the allocation of retail/office spaces. Should the staging of the development be approved and the staging of the submission of the Parking Management Plan be approved, then specific numbers and ratios need to apply to the separate buildings.

Condition 7 should relate to the entire site and should be submitted and approved concurrent with the endorsement of amended plans.

Condition 8 should relate to the entire site. Condition 9 requiring the endorsement of a Conservation Analysis does not need to be

removed. While this Condition has been satisfied, for completeness, this condition should remain on the permit.

Condition 10 should relate to the entire site. Condition 11 should relate to the entire site. Condition 12 should relate to the entire site. Condition 14 should relate to all the restaurants on the land, not only when individual

restaurants are to commence use. The removal of part of the condition referring to the maximum number of 280 seats for the restaurants is not supported as there should be a clear identification of the number of seats provided on the land, especially given that the tenancies are currently identified as ‘retail’.

Condition 15 should relate to the entire site, but could be separated into stages. Condition 22 should relate to the entire site. Condition 23 should relate to the entire site. Condition 24 should relate to the entire site.

The submission and approval of documents to satisfy Conditions 3, 5 and 7 concurrent with the endorsement of plans will reduce the need for additional modifications to the plans following the detailed design stage.

Staging the submission of various documents and plans as per staging of the development would result in a disconnected approach to the entire development. All conditions need to be satisfied as they relate to the entire site.

The applicant is also seeking amendments to conditions imposed by referral authorities. It is considered that these should be subject to the respective referral authorities approval.

Objections

In response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following comments are made:

Concerns raised by the site to the west at 227 Toorak Road, relating to overlooking, screening and amenity issues could be addressed by conditions on any amended permit to issue.




CONCLUSION

Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended that the proposal be refused for the following reasons:

The scale of the southern building is inconsistent with the scale of the Como Centre building and the ILK building.

The presentation of both buildings is not considered to be of a ‘landmark’ architectural design.

No information has been provided regarding an analysis of the impact of the amended development on the local or arterial road network or intersections.

Provision of numbers, access to and location of bicycle spaces is unsatisfactory. Staging of the development will not provide certainty that the entire site will be developed. Amendments to conditions are inappropriate as they should refer to the site as a whole.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council advise VCAT and other interested parties that it does not consent to amend Planning Permit 600/08 under Section 87A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 for the land located at 241 & 257 Toorak Road & 625 Chapel Street, South Yarra, to amend the plans and permit on the following grounds:

1. The scale, massing, setbacks and design of the development is inconsistent with the scale of the surrounding buildings and will produce a poor urban design outcome.

2. The architectural expression of the development does not comply with the design objectives of Design and Development Overlay 8 as it does not produce an iconic podium tower development or a sculptural and slender building.

3. No information has been provided regarding an analysis of the impact of the amended development on the local or arterial road network and as such, no assessment of this impact could be undertaken.

4. Number, access to and location of bicycle spaces is unsatisfactory.

5. Staging of the development will not provide certainty that the entire site will be developed.

6. Amendments to conditions are inappropriate as they should refer to the site as a whole.


2. CITY OF STONNINGTON – CYCLIST REFERENCE GROUP

Author: Tom HaysomManager: Ian McLauchlanGeneral Manager: Simon Thomas

PURPOSE

To: Advise Council of the community nominations for the Stonnington Cycling

Reference Group; and Seek approval of the recommended membership of the Stonnington Cycling

Reference Group.

BACKGROUND

At its meeting, 4 February 2013, Council considered the proposed Terms of Reference for the formation of the Stonnington Cycling Reference Group and resolved:

“That Council,

1. Endorse the Terms of Reference for the formation of the Stonnington Cycling Reference Group; 2. Nominations be sought from residents and/or business owners who are ratepayers of the City of Stonnington for membership of the Stonnington Cycling Reference Group; and 3. A further report outlining the proposed membership of the Stonnington Cycling Reference Group be presented to Council once nominations close.”

Following this resolution Council Officers, using the Terms of Reference sought expressions of interest (EoI) from residents and business owners who are rate payers in the City of Stonnington. EoI’s were sought by:

Issuing a Public Notice in the Stonnington Leader, as well as on Stonnington Website and at Council Service Centres;

Issuing a media release, which was picked up and a story run in the Stonnington Review;

Emails inviting EoI’s were sent to key stakeholders, including known cyclists residing or operating a business in Stonnington; and

Announcements at relevant community and professional forums and events.

Interested parties were required to fill out an EoI form available either online via the Stonnington website, or at one of the three main Stonnington Service Centres. EoI’s were taken over a 5 week period from 3 March to 5 April 2013.

The following section of this report will detail the review of the EoI’s and recommend a proposed membership of the Stonnington Cycling Reference Group.


DISCUSSION

A total of 17 EoI’s were received, the EoI’s from each Ward are as follows: East Ward – 10 nominees; South Ward – 5 nominees; and North Ward – 1 nominee.

1 EoI was received from outside the municipality of Stonnington and therefore was not considered.

# Assessment criteria were developed to assess each nominee. The assessment criteria were based on the questions asked on the EoI form, whereby each nominee was asked to respond to the following questions:

Interest in cycling - on road Interest in cycling – off road Experience / expertise in traffic management or traffic planning Additional Skills Additional Knowledge; and Availability

EoI’s were also assessed to ensure a reasonable geographical spread across the municipality. Business owners were assessed separately to ensure there is a business perspective on cycling within the group. The original Terms of Reference proposed representation of 3 public members on the Advisory Committee, however given the strength of the response and the desire to achieve representation across the municipality and from the business community, it is proposed to expand the public membership to include 4 representatives.

Each nomination was assessed against the assessment criteria, and it is proposed that the following nominees be appointed to the Reference Group;

East Ward ResidentEmma Donnelly: Emma Is a VicRoads accredited Senior Road Safety Auditor. Emma also has overseas experience in cycling having worked in Portland, Oregon USA designing pedestrian and cycle sensitive treatments.

South Ward ResidentNeil Bourne: Neil offers over 20 year’s professional experience as urban designer specialising in transport planning. He is also represents both the commuting side of cycling, commuting to/from the CBD every day for two years, and the recreational side of cycling, cycling the on and off road paths in Stonnington with his family most weekends.

North Ward ResidentDarren Room: Darren represents a different age cohort to cycling within Stonnington. Darren has considerable experience of cycling within Stonnington.

Business Owner Representative Darius Salkunas: Darius is the owner of ‘The Freedom Machine’, 245 Chapel St, Prahran. He will provide an insight into cycling from a cyclist, retailer and parent's point of view. As well as the ability to gain access to resources and information from the bicycle retail association Darius has worked and cycled in Stonnington for over 14 years.


Councillor Representatives Council will need to appoint a Councillor Chair and a Councillor alternate Chair.

POLICY IMPLICATIONSEndorsing a Stonnington Cycling Reference Group is supported by the Council Plan, by Council Strategies and Policies, and by the Inner Melbourne Action Plan.

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS

There are minor financial and resource implications associated with endorsing and operating a Stonnington Cycling Reference Group. These will include catering costs for the operation of the quarterly meetings, as well as Council staff time involved in the planning, running and reporting of the group.

CONCLUSION

It is proposed that the Stonnington Cyclist Reference Group consist of 4 community members; 3 community members to represent cycling within each ward of Stonnington and 1 to represent the views of cycling within the business community.

Each applicant has been assessed according to Ward of residence or Business Owner based on criteria developed from the Terms of Reference of the Stonnington Cyclist Reference Group. Based on the assessment process it is proposed that the following nominees be appointed to the Reference Group:

East Ward - Emma Donnelly; South Ward - Neil Bourne; North Ward - Darren Room; and Business Owner Representative - Daruis Salkunas.

HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION Providing Stonnington Cycling Reference Group does not limit rights as defined by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.


RECOMMENDATION

That ;

1. The proposal to amend the Stonnington Cyclist Reference Group composition to comprise 4 community representatives (1 resident from each Ward and 1 Business Owner Representative) be endorsed.

2. The following nominees be appointed as community members to the

Stonnington Cycling Reference Group : Emma Donnelly as the East Ward representative; Neil Bourne as the South Ward representative; Darren Room as the North Ward representative; and Daruis Salkunas as the Business Owner Representative.

3. The successful and unsuccessful nominees be advised accordingly.

4. That Councillor Hibbins be appointed as Chair of the Stonnington Cyclist Reference Group, Councillor McMorrow be appointed as the alternate Chair and that the Councillor positions on the Group be reviewed annually as part of the appointment process for Councillor representation to external bodies.


3. DEFIBRILLATORS AT LOCAL SPORTING CLUBS

(Author: Jackie Grieve)(General Manager: Connie Gibbons)

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to obtain Council endorsement for a new funding program to facilitate the introduction of defibrillators in sporting clubs within Stonnington.

This report provides background to the use of automatic external defibrillators and the details of a proposed Sporting Club Defibrillator Funding Program aimed at facilitating the introduction and availability of defibrillators at sporting activities in Stonnington.

BACKGROUND

An automatic external defibrillator (AED or defibrillator) is used to treat sudden cardiac arrest (SCA), a condition that occurs when the heart unexpectedly stops pumping. SCA can occur at any age. By using an AED, an electric shock can be delivered to defibrillate the person’s heart and so it will recommence pumping.

AEDs are able to quickly and accurately analyse heart rhythms to make it possible for non-professionals to administer their application without risking accidental shock. Defibrillation is most effective when carried out within three minutes of an SCA.

After repeat incidents in recent years of young Australian Rules Football players in Victoria suffering fatal cardiac arrests at training and on match days, the provision of defibrillators at community sport venues has received more attention and prompted increasing levels of support. A number of football leagues have initiated the roll out of defibrillators to all of their member clubs through subsidised purchasing schemes.

A proposed funding program has been developed to assist local sporting clubs to purchase, maintain and further train club volunteers in the use and application of AED units.

DISCUSSION

Existing AED Use and Availability

There are a number of AEDs on the market and a number of commercial and not-for-profit providers through which defibrillators can be purchased. Defibrillators range in price from $1,500 to $4,000 and can be mounted within facilities in a protective case or carried as portable units.

Programs specifically targeting sporting clubs include St John Ambulance’s Project Heart Start and Defib Your Club for Life. Each has agreements with different providers and training partners for the included and additional training, support and maintenance. Defib Your Club for Life is an initiative that has provided more than 900 units across the State as part of an Automatic Defibrillator Package priced at $2,300. This is a package of equipment, training and support aimed at meeting the needs of community sporting clubs.


Preliminary enquiries with Project Heart Start, Defib Your Club for Life and with Red Cross indicate that it would be no cheaper for Council to purchase defibrillators through these programs for distribution to Clubs than if the Clubs purchase the units themselves.

Despite promotion and programs like Defib Your Club, only four clubs within Stonnington have purchased and installed AEDs. The objective of the funding program will therefore be to increase the purchase and installation of AEDs across the municipality.

Proposed Funding Program

Approximately 70 sporting clubs operate from 48 Council facilities in Stonnington, including football, cricket, lacrosse, rugby, lawn bowls, tennis and netball.

Some clubs may require multiple units to provide coverage across multiple venues on match days. Cricket clubs for example may have up to five sides playing at different venues at the same time. It is therefore difficult to accurately calculate the number of units that would be required to cover every club for every venue.

It will be beneficial for clubs to contribute or source additional funding for the purchase of a defibrillator to encourage a sense of ownership and responsibility for the unit.

Sporting Club Defibrillator Grant Guidelines

# Officers have developed Draft Sporting Club Defibrillator Grant Guidelines which are attached.

In accordance with the guidelines Stonnington sporting clubs operating in Council facilities will be eligible to receive up to $1,000 toward the cost of each defibrillator unit. Priority allocation will be given to clubs that:

Actively support junior, senior and female participation; Demonstrate a high number of members with current first aid qualifications; Clearly identify the model, supplier and price of the unit they will be purchasing; Identify a location for the unit; and, Identified the requirement for and means to address ongoing training and

maintenance.

Officers will assess each application on its merit, and will prioritise the allocation of funding.

The future of the program will be assessed following the completion of the first funding round.

Club Responsibilities

Clubs that apply for a AED unit grant would be responsible for the purchase and operation of their units, including installation, training and maintenance in accordance with their first aid practices.


FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS

An amount of $15,000 has been included in the draft 2013/14 budget to enable the Sporting Club Defibrillator Grant Program to be introduced.

Club demand will determine the extent to which funding is provided. Under the guidelines, Council has the capacity to fund the purchase of 15 units.

HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION The recommendation complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.

CONCLUSION

In response to a growing awareness and opportunities to purchase discounted AED units through programs such as Defib Your Club for Life, it is recommended that Council introduces a new funding program to support the purchase of units within clubs in Stonnington. The program will be administered by Council’s Recreation Services Unit and will be announced at the commencement of the 2013/14 financial year.

The ongoing costs associated with providing the AED units, including installation, training needs analysis and implementation and assuming ongoing responsibility for their maintenance and servicing needs would be the responsibility of the clubs, however Council will support their ongoing use and maintenance through its Club Development Program.

The future of the program will be determined following the completion of the first funding round and an assessment of demand.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. Council endorse the introduction of the Stonnington Sporting Club Defibrillator Grant Program and funding guidelines attached to this report.

2. Council review the program at the completion of the first funding round.


4. MUIR PAVILION CHANGE ROOM REFURBISHMENT– PLAQUE APPROVAL

(Author: Jackie Grieve)(General Manager: Connie Gibbons)

PURPOSE

This report seeks approval from Council to install a plaque to commemorate the completion of the Muir Pavilion Change Room Redevelopment.

BACKGROUND

Redevelopment of the change rooms and amenities at Muir Pavilion (Sir Zelman Cowen Park No. 4) commenced in February 2013 and was completed in May 2013 for a total cost of $350,000.

The project was jointly funded by the City of Stonnington $180,000, Glen Iris Junior Football Club $110,000, and State Government of Victoria $60,000. The works have:

ensured the changerooms comply with the Building Code of Australia; improved the functionality, accessibility, sustainability and standard of basic amenities

to meet the needs of current and future users; involved the construction of an accessible toilet for people with disabilities; improved changerooms to accommodate females, umpires and people with disabilities;

and increased storage areas.

DISCUSSION

An official opening for the refurbished pavilion is planned for 9am on Sunday 30 June 2013 to coincide with club activities. The official unveiling will take place just prior to the first junior football game and will include a breakfast.

The decision to install a plaque was made in recognition of the extensive works and cooperation and contribution from funding partners. It is also a requirement of the State Government that all projects funded through the Facilities Funding program carry a permanent acknowledgement of the Victorian Government.

CONCLUSIONIn recognition of the works undertaken and to commemorate the completion of the Muir Pavilion Change Room Redevelopment, it is recommended that a plaque be displayed inside the refurbished Muir Pavilion.


The plaque will read:

MUIR PAVILION CHANGE ROOM REFURBISHMENT

Opened by His Worship the Mayor, Cr Matthew Koce,on 30 June 2013

Cr John Chandler Cr Sam Hibbins Cr John McMorrow Cr Adrian Stubbs Cr Erin Davie Cr Jami Klisaris Cr Melina Sehr Cr Claude Ullin

Chief Executive Officer, Warren Roberts

This project was funded by the City of Stonnington with support from the Glen Iris Junior Football Club and Victorian Government Community

Facility Funding Program.

The City of Stonnington, Glen Iris Junior Football Club and Victorian Government and logos will appear on the plaque.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council approves the display of the following plaque at Muir Pavilion to mark the completion of the redevelopment.

MUIR PAVILION CHANGE ROOM REFURBISHMENT

Opened by His Worship the Mayor, Cr Matthew Koce,on 30 June 2013

Cr John Chandler Cr Sam Hibbins Cr John McMorrow Cr Adrian Stubbs Cr Erin Davie Cr Jami Klisaris Cr Melina Sehr Cr Claude Ullin

Chief Executive Officer, Warren Roberts

This project was funded by the City of Stonnington with support from the Glen Iris Junior Football Club and Victorian Government Community

Facility Funding Program.

The City of Stonnington, Victorian Government and Glen Iris Junior Football Club logos will appear on the plaque.


5. LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONSTITUTIONAL RECOGNITION – MAV CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION

Author: Geoff Cockram, General Manager Corporate ServicesCEO: Warren Roberts

PURPOSE

For Council to consider whether it wishes to make a contribution of $37,515 to the Municipal Association of Victoria for a marketing campaign in support of a ‘yes’ vote on constitutional recognition of local government.

BACKGROUND

The matter of constitutional recognition will possibly be included in a referendum to be held in conjunction with the Federal election announced for 14 September 2013.

Constitutional recognition for local government has been talked about for many years but recently became of increased interest following two significant court cases known as the ‘Pape’ and ‘Williams’ cases.

MAV – Request for Financial Contribution

The Municipal Association of Victorian has written to Council by letter dated 30 April 2013 seeking a voluntary contribution of $37,515 toward a ‘yes’ vote campaign.

# A copy of the letter is attached.

# As further information the Association has also provided a Members Brief and article from the Financial Review 3 May 2013 on the subject.

FINANCE AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

No allowance is included in the 2012/2013 budget or 2013/2014 draft budget for this request.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

The contribution is voluntary. There are no legal impediments to Council providing funds to advocate for a given outcome in the referendum if it proceeds.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council determine the matter.


6. COUNCILLOR CODE OF CONDUCT

Author: Fabienne ThewlisGeneral Manager: Geoff Cockram

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is for Council to review its Code of Conduct.

BACKGROUND

Section 76C (2) of the Local Government Act 1989 requires Council to review its Councillor Code of Conduct within 12 months after a general election.

Council ‘s Code of Conduct was originally adopted in 2001 with subsequent revisions in 2004, 2008 and 2009. Councillors made and signed the following declaration when they were sworn in as Councillors on 8 November 2012:

“I, (name), do solemnly, sincerely, and truly declare and affirm that I will observe and perform my duties as a Councillor of the Stonnington City Council in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct under section 76B, 76BA and 76C of the Local Government Act 1989 and General Local Law 2008(No 1) section 451.”

Revised Councillor Code of Conduct

# Attached for consideration by Council is a revised Councillor Code of Conduct.

The revised code has been prepared based on the existing code with layout changes and additional matters included and commentary in line with the Council Plan 2013 – 17.

The Councillor Code of Conduct (a) must include the Councillor conduct principles;(b) may set out processes for the purpose of resolving an internal dispute between

Councillors;(c) must include provisions in respect of any matter prescribed for the purpose (d) may include any other matters relating to the conduct of Councillors which the

Council considers appropriate.

The Code addresses such matters as: Councillor standards Councillor /staff relationships Council and confidential information Disclosure of Interest procedures Ward issues Protected Disclosure Equal opportunity Human rights Caretaker policy Assembly of Councillors Councillor Briefings Dispute resolution Mayor’s role


RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. the Councillor Code of Conduct be approved and adopted and Councillors reaffirm that they will observe the Code of Conduct for Councillors by renewing their declaration;

2. a copy of the adopted Councillor Code of Conduct be provided to all Councillors;

3. the adopted Councillor Code of Conduct be included on Council’s website;

4. the adopted Councillor Code of Conduct be available for inspection by the public at Council offices and libraries.


n) Confidential Business

1. PRAHRAN MARKET MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT

(Author / General Manager: Geoff Cockram)

Confidential report circulated separately.

pro-forma for notice paper word 7 - city of stonnington€¦ · web viewi am not aware of any...

Documents