1.17 45-49 portman street, oakleigh the construction of an apartment building … · 45-49 portman...

Council Meeting, 28 March 2017 Section 1.17 –

45-49 Portman Street, Oakleigh - The Construction Of An Apartment Building And Associated

Works, Use Of The Land For Accommodation (Dwellings), Partial Demolition And Alteration To The Existing Heritage Building, Reduction In The Residential Visitor Car Parking Requirement And

Waiver Of The Loading Facilities Requirement

1.17 45-49 PORTMAN STREET, OAKLEIGH THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN APARTMENT BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED WORKS, USE OF THE LAND FOR ACCOMMODATION (DWELLINGS), PARTIAL DEMOLITION AND ALTERATION TO THE EXISTING HERITAGE BUILDING AND REDUCTION IN THE RESIDENTIAL VISITOR CAR PARKING REQUIREMENT (TPA/46599)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This application proposes the development of a residential apartment building up to seven (7) storeys in height. The proposed development includes the partial demolition and alteration of the existing heritage building, a ground floor retail tenancy, thirty six (36) apartments and forty three (43) car spaces within a two (2) level basement. The proposal also seeks a reduction in residential visitor car parking and a waiver of loading facilities. An appeal has been lodged with Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) against Council’s failure to determine the application within the prescribed time. Council is unable to determine the application but must form a position on the application. The application was subject to public notification. Six (6) objections to the proposal have been received. Key issues to be considered relate to building scale, compliance with the preferred height guidance of the Oakleigh Major Activity Centre Structure Plan, contribution to the traditional village character, overshadowing, internal amenity and adequacy of car parking provision and vehicle access. This report assesses the proposal against the provisions of the Monash Planning Scheme including the relevant state and local planning policy framework, and issues raised by objectors. The reason for presenting this report to Council is the proposed development cost of $9.84 million. The proposal is considered inconsistent with the relevant provisions of the Monash Planning Scheme and it is recommended that the application not be supported. RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Peter Panagakos

RESPONSIBLE MANAGER: Angela Hughes

RESPONSIBLE PLANNER: James Heitmann





WARD: Oakleigh

PROPERTY ADDRESS: 45-49 Portman Street, Oakleigh

PRE-APPLICATION MEETING: Yes

NUMBER OF OBJECTIONS: Six (6)

ZONING: Commercial 1 Zone

EXISTING LAND USE: Retail Tenancy and Residential

OVERLAY: Design and Development Overlay - Schedule 11 Parking Overlay – Schedule 2 Heritage Overlay- Schedule 67

RELEVANT CLAUSES: State Planning Policy Framework Clause 11 – Settlement Clause 11.04 – Metropolitan Melbourne Clause 13.03-1 – Use of Contaminated Land Clause 14.02-1 – Catchment Planning and Management Clause 15 – Built Environment and Heritage Clause 16 – Housing Clause 17 – Economic Development

Local Planning Policy Framework Clause 21 – Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.04 – Residential Development Clause 21.05 – Economic Development Clause 21.06 – Activity Centres Clause 21.15 – Oakleigh Major Activity Centre Structure Plan Clause 22 – Local Planning Policies Clause 22.01 – Residential Development and Character Policy Particular Provisions Clause 52.06 – Car Parking Clause 52.07 – Loading and unloading of vehicles Clause 52.36 – Integrated transport planning Clause 52.34 – Bicycle facilities General Provisions Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines

STATUTORY PROCESSING DATE: 20 November 2016

DEVELOPMENT COST: $9.84 million





LOCALITY PLAN

NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

SUBJECT SITE





RECOMMENDATION:

A. That Council resolves that if it were in a position to make a decision, it would determine to Refuse the application (TPA/46599) for the the construction of an apartment building and associated works, use of the land for accommodation (dwellings), partial demolition and alteration to the existing heritage building, reduction in the residential visitor car parking requirement and waiver of the loading facilities requirement at 45-49 Portman Street, Oakleigh on the following grounds:

1. The proposal is inconsistent with Clause 21.15 being the Oakleigh Major Activity Centre Structure Plan.

2. The proposal is inconsistent with the objectives and requirements of Design and Development Overlay – Schedule 11.

3. The proposed development is excessive in building height, scale and massing having regard to the surrounding context and applicable policy.

4. The proposed vehicle access arrangement and car parking design does not meet the provisions of Clause 52.06 and Schedule 2 of the Parking Overlay

5. The proposal will result in a poor level of internal amenity for future residents.

6. The proposal development has an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining properties.

B. That Council writes to VCAT, the applicant and all other parties advising of

its position.

C. Authorises the Director of City Development (or representative) to consider any amended plans, modify refusal grounds and resolve the matter at any VCAT conducted compulsory conference or hearing on the basis of changes to make the proposal generally compliant with the provisions of the Monash Planning Scheme.

BACKGROUND:

The Site and Surrounds The subject land is located on the northern side of Portman Street in Oakleigh, approximately 55 metres west of its intersection with Hanover Street. The land comprises a rectangular shaped parcel with a total site area of 983 square





metres. The site has a primary street frontage to Portman Street of 35 metres with a lot depth of 27 metres. The northern boundary (rear) of the site abuts common property associated with 24-28 Chester Street for the majority of the length of this boundary. The north-eastern corner of the site however is afforded access via a right of way Road Reserve ‘R1’, which adjoins the existing Council car park. The land currently retains an existing single storey brick building to the Portman Street frontage. The existing development comprises an inter war Spanish Mission style facade which addresses Portman Street, with the rear portion of the site reflecting later construction, two storey red brick building with under croft parking. This portion of the building is currently being utilised for residential purposes. The land is subject to a site specific Heritage Overlay (HO67) being the former ‘Plaza’ picture theatre. The Monash Heritage Study (1998) describes the building as:

“A former picture theatre in the Spanish Mission Style having parapeted pavilions, stepped with half round terminations, niches and stylised beam ends surmounting grouped round arched windows. There is a prominent campanile with oculus windows and pyramidal roof, the terra cotta tiles to the campanile and mock roof being Cordovan pattern. The main entrances have ornamented flat arches in the manner characteristic of the Style. Inside, the main theatre is occupied by squash courts (not inspected). The rear theatre is externally of utilitarian design in face brickwork.”

The picture theatre was converted into squash courts in the early 1960’s. Planning Permit No. 25194 was issued on 17 December 1998 allowing conversion of the existing building into 2 shops and 6 dwellings and associated basement car parking. Vehicle access to the site is via the rear laneway and Hanover Street western car park. Pedestrian access to the dwellings is from Portman Street. The property is located mid block within the commercial ‘core’ of the Oakleigh Major Activity Centre. Adjacent properties and those directly opposite the site comprise narrow frontage single storey brick shop premises. The site is located within immediate close proximity to the Oakleigh Railway Station (250 metres) and is considered to be well serviced by public transport. An aerial photograph of the subject site and surrounding land can be found attached to this report (Attachment 2).





PROPOSAL:

An application has been received by Council for the construction of a seven (7) storey mixed use development, comprising a shop tenancy addressing Portman Street and thirty six (36) apartments. The existing heritage building is to be retained as part of the development, with the facade reinstated. The more recent additions to the rear of the site are proposed to be demolished. Key details of the proposal can be summarised as:

• One (1) shop with a total floor space of 200m2 at ground level fronting Portman Street.

• Nine (9) one bedroom apartments.

• Twenty seven (27) two bedroom apartments.

• Thirty six (36) resident car park spaces provided at ground level within a car stacker arrangement to a lower level semi-basement.

• Two (2) visitor car park spaces.

• One (1) disabled space for the commercial tenancy.

• Nine (9) resident bicycle spaces at basement level and two (2) visitor bicycle spaces provided on-street.

• Access to car parking area via the rear (northern) laneway.

• Apartment tower material and finishes include glazing elements, a variety of grey rendered finishes, a variety of grey metal cladding and louvers and stainless steel cables and framing for future landscaping.

Attachment 1 details plans forming part of the application.

PERMIT TRIGGERS:

Zoning The land is zoned Commercial 1 under the provisions of the Monash Planning Scheme. Pursuant to the requirements of Clause 34.01-1 a permit is required for accommodation (including a dwelling) where the frontage at ground level exceeds 2 metres. No permit is required for use of premises as a shop within the zone.

Pursuant to the requirements of Clause 34.01-4 a permit is required to construct a building within the zone.





Overlays The land is subject to Design and Development Overlay (Schedule 11). Pursuant to the requirements of Clause 43.02-2 a permit is required to construct a building. Buildings and works must be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the schedule to the overlay. The subject land is located within Precinct 1. The preferred height guidance for the precinct is development up to 4 storeys. The land is not identified as a strategic redevelopment site. The land is subject to Parking Overlay (Schedule 2). Pursuant to the provisions of the overlay, a permit is required and a cash-in-lieu contribution is applicable for any deficient car parking having regard to the car parking provision requirements of Clause 52.06. A permit cannot be granted for a reduction to car parking under for a ‘Shop' use unless parking credits exist. The land is subject to Heritage Overlay (HO67). Pursuant to the requirements of Clause 43.01, a permit is required for the partial demolition and the construction of buildings and works. Attachment 3 details the zoning and overlays applicable to the subject site and surrounding land.

CONSULTATION:

Permit Applicant Consultation No further information was requested however correspondence was provided to the Applicant via email, dated 24 October 2016. In this correspondence, Officers raised the following preliminary concerns. • The height and scale of the development exceeds the preferred height

guidance of Design and Development Overlay 11 (DDO11). Building height substantially in excess of the Oakleigh Major Activity Centre Structure Plan is unlikely to be supported by Council.

• The extent of overshadowing on the public realm exceeds that envisaged by DDO11.

• Proposed balcony minimum dimensions are somewhat narrow and should be widened to provide improved recreational open space amenity.

• Adequacy of car parking provision, vehicle access arrangements and waiver of the loading facilities requirement are to be assessed by Council’s engineering division.

• Vehicle access to the site via the existing Council car park will require further discussion regarding ongoing access entitlement.





Officers advised the Applicant in writing the proposal as submitted is unlikely to be supported by Council. The Permit Applicant responded to this letter on the 28 October, 2016. In relation to the preliminary concerns raised, the Applicant provided the following response: • We acknowledge the preferred height and setback requirements however

consider that the existing site conditions of the subject land warrant an alternative design response for several reasons (as outlined in Section 6.2 of the planning submission report prepared by SJB Planning) but namely given the existing heritage building and the proposal’s intention to retain this building and its address to Portman Street.

• Particular care has been given to ensuring that solar access to the southern side of Portman Street is retained as is demonstrated in the shadow analysis.

• The balcony concerns are noted and we can undertake a full review of the balcony dimensions and consider the increase of these once all referral comments and advertising has been considered.

• Inadequacy of car parking provisions and vehicle access arrangements include the waiver of loading facilities are noted.

• The issue of vehicle access to the site via the existing Council car park will require further discussion regarding ongoing access entitlement is noted.

The Applicant was verbally advised at the conclusion of the advertising period that the proposal would not be supported by Council Officer’s. Public Notice Notice of the application was given pursuant to the requirements of Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Three (3) large signs were displayed on the site during the notification period. Six (6) objections to the proposal were received. The key concerns raised within the objections are summarised as: • Impact to local character. • Precedent of over development within the precinct. • Access and ongoing traffic management to the site via common property

and the right of way, without specific reciprocal rights of access afforded to the site on the Certificate of Title.

• Sunlight access and overshadowing to the street. • Construction management impacts – pedestrian access, loading from rear

and security costs.





Attachment 4 details the location of objector properties. Referrals The application has been referred to Council’s Traffic and Drainage Engineers for comment. Relevant comments form part of the assessment of the application.

DISCUSSION:

Consistency with State and Local Planning Policies Increased residential density and dwelling diversity is sought by State and Local policies in proximity to transport hubs and activity centres such as the Oakleigh Major Activity Centre. Clause 15.01-2, Built Environment and Heritage State Planning Policy, specifies the urban design principles for residential development of four or more storeys in height. The Policy seeks to:

“To achieve architectural and urban design outcomes that contribute positively to local urban character and enhance the public realm while minimising detrimental impact on neighbouring properties.”

Clause 15 sets out urban design principles to assess this application against which relate to context, the public realm, safety, landmarks, views and vistas, pedestrian spaces, heritage, consolidation of sites and empty sites, light and shade, energy and resource efficiency, architectural quality and landscape architecture. Council’s Residential Development Policy (Clause 21.04) seeks to deliver a variety of housing typologies to respond to the changing demographics of the municipality, whilst remaining sympathetic to the existing neighbourhood character. The policy stipulates high rise residential development is to be directed to Major Activity Centres which are well serviced by public transport, employment, recreation and education uses. The site is considered to be appropriate for higher density residential development being located within the Oakleigh Major Activity Centre and serviced by the Oakleigh Railway Station, as well as the amenities and services within the immediate locality, meeting the requirements under Clause 21.04. Oakleigh Major Activity Structure Plan The site is subject to the provisions of Clause 21.15, the Oakleigh Major Activity Centre Structure Plan. The key planning principles that underpin the Oakleigh Major Activity Centre Structure Plan (OMACSP) as they apply to the site include:





“To enhance the structure and function of the Oakleigh Major Activity Centre by supporting its continuing development as a vibrant and prosperous activity centre.”

“To develop the Oakleigh Major Activity Centre as a mixed use activity centre incorporating retail, commercial, cultural, civic, and residential uses. Focus on the improvement of vehicle access, circulation, parking, and loading/unloading activity, and pedestrian and bicycle movement and safety.”

“Enable increased diversity and density of dwellings in the activity centre.”

“Facilitate commercial and housing development within the activity centre in a manner which supports the preferred future character for the centre; and avoids conflicts with surrounding land uses.” “Ensure new development, adjacent to existing residential development located within the interface of the activity centre respects and integrates with the scale, siting and character of the prevailing built form.”

The site is identified within Precinct 1 – Oakleigh Village, which retains a traditional local character comprising low rise buildings, narrow frontage and tradition shop fronts with awnings. The site is identified under OMACSP for mixed use development with retail/ commercial at the lower levels and residential uses on the upper floors. The proposals retention of the existing heritage building and facade is considered to maintain the site’s current contribution to the streetscape ensuring the traditional local character is respected. The form and scale of development within the Precinct 1 is however considered to be a critical built form aspect to maintaining the traditional character. Whilst the proposal is considered to give due regard to setbacks to ensure visual impacts at street level are minimised, the overall bulk and scale of the development, as well as the external treatments at the upper podium level does not satisfactorily address the desired character outcomes. Design and Development Overlay – DD011 The site is subject to Design and Development Overlay, Schedule 11 (DDO11) which prescribes the applicable design requirements of the OMACSP. The following building heights and setbacks are specified by the DDO11: • Zero street setback up to façade height of 10 metres. • Upper levels setback 2 metres for every 1m of building height above the

facade;





• Maximum overall building height up to 14 metres (4 storeys). • Setbacks from rear and side boundaries should have regard to the nature

of abutting uses. The proposal does not comply with the height provisions of DD011, proposing seven (7) storeys. Buildings should not exceed the preferred building height unless a particular site condition warrants an alternate design response and that the design response demonstrates respect for and significantly contributes to, the preferred character. Whilst the proposal seeks to retain the heritage building, the building’s configuration being rectangular and situated to the Portman Street frontage, is not considered to represent a unique site condition. The retention of the existing building is not considered to place excessive development limitations on the built form response, or substantially reduce development potential and as such, a dispensation to height on the basis of heritage retention is not supported. The overall scale of the proposal substantially exceeds the nominated preferred height and setback requirement of DDO11 and compromises the lower scale form envisaged within the commercial core of the Oakleigh Village where development should not exceed 4-5 storeys. Whilst the larger size of the subject land may lend itself to the opportunity for increased overall height and greater development opportunity, should additional height be considered it should be provided consistent with the building envelope limit as identified under DDO11. Assessment of Proposal The Assessment of the proposal has been prepared against the Design and Development Overlay and the OMACSP provisions for the site. Given the Commercial zoning of the site, the objectives, standards and decision guidelines of Clause 55 can be applied to residential development in accordance with Clause 34.01-8. The provisions of Clause 55 do not however apply to development of five storeys or more, and therefore the Applicant has provided justification to address the provisions of the State Governments Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development. Notwithstanding, a DDO11 height compliant development (4 storeys) would be assessed under the the provisions of Clause 55 and as such, have been applied to the proposal. Furthermore, the Better Apartments Design Standards whilst not yet introduced to the Scheme is considered a seriously entertained document and therefore has also been utilised as a guide to compliment this assessment. The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning has advised that these standards are to





come into effect in March, 2017 by way of an amendment to the Victorian Planning Provisions. Dwelling Diversity The proposal whilst delivering density within the activity centre and contributing to the variety of housing typologies in the locality, comprises one and two bedroom dwellings only. This dwelling mix, particularly the absence of three bedroom dwellings is not considered to appropriately respond to the dwelling diversity requirements of Clause 55.02-3. Scale and Bulk As previously discussed, the proposed development fails to have appropriate regard for the scale and built form hierarchy as envisaged by the OMACSP. The structure plan nominates a maximum four storey scale within this precinct, transitioning from a 3 storey facade at the main street edge. The retention of the existing building and the 8 metre setback to the upper podium level, is acknowledged to provide a reduced building envelope and an improved street edge to that currently envisaged under the OMACSP. The tower component to the rear of the site however exceeds the maximum height by an additional 3 storeys. The design response poorly integrates with the scale of existing development on surrounding properties and future scale of development envisaged of the OMACSP. The absence of side setbacks create a significant visual impact when applied to the additional height sought. Development of the scale proposed result in a visually dominant building having a substantial impact on the visual amenity of both the immediate and wider context of the Oakleigh Village. The external metal cladding treatment, the palette of greys and the lack of articulation to the facade proposed to Levels 1 to 3, further accentuates the bulk and appearance of the upper floors to the streetscape. Whilst contemporary materials are supported in proposals which retain heritage elements to create a distinct juxtaposition between original and new elements, the consistent form of the podium and the application of a limited variety of materials to a large expanse of the facade, does not result in a suitable design response which minimises the presence of bulk and scale to the traditional village streetscape character.





In light of the above, it is considered further attention is required to the presentation, the lack of articulation and the resulting visual prominence of bulk of the podium to the streetscape. Private Open Space Private open space is provided by way of balconies. Balcony sizes are provided to meet the minimum 8 square metre requirements, as stipulated under Clause 55.05-4. All balconies are however provided with a minimum depth of less than 1.6 metre, with the exception of the north facing dwellings on Level 1 and the east facing dwellings of Levels 4 to 6. The development proposes 12 of the 36 dwellings orientated south, with the balcony areas being within shade for the duration of the day. The front setbacks, the lack of articulation/ staggering of the facade as well as the height of the tower, are considered to limit the private open space design and solar access. The balcony designs could be significantly improved to extend the southern Level 1 balconies within the setback from the heritage building, utilising space and providing the opportunity for significant planting and rainwater capture. This would also assist in softening the facade and reducing the visual prominence of the podium level. The north facing balconies whilst appropriately orientated for winter sunlight access are insufficient in depth to protect dwellings from summer heat load to windows. Whilst the bedroom windows are provided with operable louvres, the balcony areas provide limited depth for awning protection. The balcony designs are therefore not considered to be satisfactory to serve the needs of the future residents. It is recommended the balconies be redesigned to consider appropriate solar access and useability of balcony space. Design Detail Despite the substantial overall height and scale of the development, the design response does demonstrate a satisfactory level of architectural quality. As noted however, the extensive application of the limited palette of materials and finishes requires further consideration with the introduction of soften material elements desired. The design response however pays limited attention to the eastern and western facades, which comprise white and grey metal cladding to the eastern facade and a mixture of pre-cast concrete wall and metal cladding the western facade. Both will be highly exposed to the wider public realm particularly when viewed from Portman and Hanover Streets. Whilst longer term the lower levels may be





screened given adjacent development, upper floors will remain visually prominent in the immediate locality. The prominence of this facade is exacerbated by substantial and inappropriate scale of the development. Overshadowing Whilst the Applicant has stated that the design of the building has paid specific attention to the shadows cast to Portman Street, the shadows cast by the development on the current and potential future amenity of adjoining properties is of concern. Future development of these properties is likely to be in the form of shop-top apartments, including apartments with southerly orientated open space and habitable room windows. The design response should have adequate regard for equitable development opportunity of adjoining properties to the south taking into account overshadowing, visual bulk and adequate separation. Internal Amenity The layout of proposed apartments provides for an unsatisfactory level of internal amenity. The design reflects minimum area provisions for bedrooms, living areas and internal circulation/ access which require further revision to ensure a satisfactory level of amenity for future residents is achieved. Specifically, the design requires the following revisions:

• Living area dimensions should consider the ‘functional area’ of these spaces. The majority of the apartment designs do not provide for sufficient areas of movement around living spaces, such as the placement of dining spaces within 300mm-400mm of kitchen benches/ cupboards or front doors opening directly into restricted living spaces.

• The majority of bedrooms are designed to a depth which requires the use of sliding doors to ensure movement around furniture is achieved. This is not considered satisfactory particularly when bedrooms are located off small living areas.

• Natural ventilation is not considered by way of the placement of windows, and therefore does not maximise opportunities for breeze paths.

• Useability of balcony spaces, given their depth. Landscaping In addition to the substantial scale of the development, the design response does not provide for any scope to provide for meaningful deep root planting opportunities within the development. As previously discussed the podium level both at its northern and southern boundaries provide the opportunity for canopy





tree planting and landscaping which would assist in softening the scale of the development and improve the aspect and amenity of the public. The use of green landscaping to walls is supported, however further consideration to the species of planting is required to the southern facade of the building which will be subject to a more hostile environment with restricted sunlight. Car Parking, Traffic & Vehicle Access Car parking should be provided in accordance with the requirement specified by Clause 45.09 and 52.06-6 of the Monash Planning Scheme. The table below details the number of car parking spaces required:

Use Clause 52.06-5 Requirement

Floor Area (m2) / No. of dwellings

Car parking requirement

generated

Car parking provision proposed

Shop 3.1 spaces /100m2 200m2 6 car spaces 1 disabled car spaces

Dwellings (1 & 2

bedroom apartments)

1 space per dwelling

36 apartments 36 car spaces 36 car spaces

Residential visitor

1 space per 5 dwellings

36 apartments 7 car spaces 2 car spaces

TOTAL REQUIRED

49 car spaces

TOTAL PROVIDED

39 car spaces

The development does not provide for requisite number of car parking spaces having regard to the requirements of Clause 52.06. The application seeks a dispensation for a reduction in residential visitor car parking requirement and payment of a car parking contribution for deficient shop car parking having regard to the provisions of the Parking Overlay – Schedule 2. Provision of a car parking contribution pursuant to the provisions of Parking Overlay – Schedule 2 would be appropriate should a permit be issued. The Applicant has provided a Traffic Report to assess the impacts of the development and shortfall of parking. The City’s Traffic Engineers have reviewed the report and provide the following comments: • Council’s parking occupancy surveys for the Oakleigh Activity Centre

indicate higher parking demands than indicated in the Applicant’s traffic report, with trader parking particularly affected. It is considered that the





provision of only one staff space on-site for a tenancy of this size is an under provision and at least 2 retail staff spaces should be provided on the site. Parking requirements for Shop uses furthermore, cannot be reduced under Schedule 2 of the Parking Overlay.

• In regard to visitor parking, the traffic report notes that a resident parking demand of 0.10 should be adopted for the development which would result in a peak demand of 4 spaces. It is considered that given the much higher parking demands often experienced within the Oakleigh Activity Centre (with vacancy rates as low as 3% recorded), the peak demand of 4 visitor spaces should be accommodated on the site with a waiver of 3 visitor spaces considered more reasonable.

• There is concern regarding the stacker system which only allows for vehicles up to 5.0m in length which precludes longer vehicles from accessing the system which may create a reliance on alternative parking outside the development. It is recommended that the stacker system be designed to cater for a vehicle up to 5.2m in length which would cater for larger vehicles. According to the car stacker specification, this would require a minor lengthening of 200mm for each bank of stackers.

• Reliance on the 2 visitor spaces to be vacant (when there is the potential for overnight visitors to occupy the spaces) is not considered acceptable. Given the awkward nature of the access to the site and its reliance on access via a public car park, it is considered essential for the safety of pedestrians and car park users that waste vehicles are able to exit the site in a forward direction at all times.

• The provision of a small loading area (i.e. around 3.6m x 5.5m) for service vehicles is required. It is suggested the loading area could potentially be co-located with the required dedicated turnaround for the waste vehicle.

The proposed vehicle access arrangement via the rear laneway is not considered satisfactory in its current form. As previously discussed the rear access comprises: • A right of way under the ownership of 32-34 Chester Street, and • Common property to the benefit of 24 – 28 Chester Street.

Whilst implied rights of access are afforded to the property given the use of the laneway area from the early 1920’s, further resolution of this issue is required to ensure access in perpetuity is provided to the development.

RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS:

• Impact to local character. • Precedent of over development within the precinct. • Access and ongoing traffic management to the site via common property

and the right of way.





• Sunlight access and overshadowing to the street. • Construction management impacts – pedestrian access, loading from rear

and security costs. The above concerns raised by objectors are considered to be addressed through the above discussion and the recommendation to refuse the application, with the exception of the construction management impacts. Whilst pedestrian and vehicle access are standard site issues to be managed through a construction management plan, the adjacent jewellery tenancy and the issues raised regarding vibration impacts to on-site alarms will require specific construction management procedures. This generally can be dealt with by way of a noise and vibration management plan.

CONCLUSION:

Whilst the proposal would satisfy the increased density objectives of the Monash Planning Scheme, it is considered it does so at the expense of fundamental and critical areas of Oakleigh Major Activity Centre Structure Plan. The design response displays inadequate regard for the surrounding context having insufficient consideration of building height and scale, design detail, overshadowing, landscaping and future amenity outcomes for residents. Neither a more substantial site area, nor the retention of the heritage building is considered sufficient justification for development of significantly increased density and scale. The proposal is excessive in its built form given the locality, and is not considered to demonstrate site responsive design to support the increased development of the site. The proposal also requires resolution of vehicular access and egress to the site, as well as providing appropriate parking and servicing for the uses envisaged. It is recommended that the application not be supported.





LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 – Proposed Development Plans. Attachment 2 – Aerial Photograph (October 2014). Attachment 3 – Zoning and Overlays Map. Attachment 4 – Objector Properties Location Map.

1.17 45-49 portman street, oakleigh the construction of an apartment building … · 45-49 portman...

Documents