upc2 2 & 4 barenya court kew - city of boroondara...demolition of existing buildings (page 28);...

UPC2 2 & 4 Barenya Court Kew Application no.: PP16/00974 (File 40/409/21180) Responsible Director John Luppino

City Planning Authorised by: Simon Mitchell

Manager Statutory Planning Report officer: Adam Haines

Senior Planner Statutory Planning

Abstract Proposal The proposal seeks to construct 25 dwellings over two lots (Nos. 2 and 4 Barenya Court). The proposal comprises twenty-one townhouses and four apartments. The dwellings have a two and three storey scale and sit over a basement car park with sixty-five car spaces for residents and visitors. Issues The following are key issues in respect of this application: Scale of the proposed development and neighbourhood character (Pages 37-

41); Traffic and car parking (Pages 21-26); Potential overshadowing (Page 48-49); Removal of existing trees and proposed landscaping (Pages 15-19 and Page

36) ; Demolition of existing buildings (Page 28); and Matters raised by objectors (Pages 52-54). Officer's response Details of the proposal, discussion of all objections and assessment against relevant controls and policies are contained in the attachment to this report. Overall it is considered that the proposed development suitably responds to its unique context and will integrate with the surrounding area without unreasonably impacting the amenity of directly adjacent dwellings. Given the location of the site directly abutting a commercial area, it is considered that the design response provides an appropriate transition to the residential context of Barenya Court. Car parking provision for both residents and visitors fully complies with the Statutory requirement, and Council’s Traffic Engineers consider the future traffic generation to be acceptable.

______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________Urban Planning Special Committee Agenda 05/06/17

City of Boroondara 2 & 4 Barenya Court Kew of 88

Council’s arborist has reviewed all vegetation to be removed from the site and is satisfied with the proposed landscaping, subject to the conditions contained within the Officer recommendation. The existing buildings on site are not subject to a heritage overlay, therefore their demolition is considered to be acceptable. All other matters raised by objectors have been addressed throughout this report and in the summary on pages 51-53. Officers' recommendation That the Urban Planning Special Committee resolve that Notice of Decision No. PP16/00974 for buildings and works to construct 25 dwellings over two lots including buildings and works over common property (4 Barenya Court) pursuant to Clause 32.08 at 2-4 Barenya Court, Kew be issued under the Boroondara Planning Scheme subject to the following conditions: Amended plans required 1. Before the development starts, amended plans to the satisfaction of the

responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three (3) copies provided. When the plans are endorsed they will then form part of the permit. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans advertised 31 March 2017 but modified to show: (a) Accurate details of the areas of the secluded private open space of 5/910

Glenferrie Road adjacent to the subject site shown on the plans. These details must be shown on all floor plans and reflect the plan submitted to Council on 5 May 2017 (TP-501 and 504);

(b) The height of Dwelling W-06 lowered so that the height to the top of the roof (Internal East Elevation) is 75.00AHD, as shown in the plan submitted to Council on 5 May 2017 (TP-504);

(c) Notation on the basement plan that all visitor spaces are to be made available to all visitors (and not contained within a tandem space);

(d) The Tree Protection Zones of Trees 19 (TPZ: 5.4m radius), 22, 23, 24 and 25 as detailed in the preliminary arboricultural assessment report, Julia Reynolds, 14 March 2016, drawn on all site and floor plans;

(e) Notation on all site and floor plans that Trees 19, 22, 23, 24 and 25 are to be retained and protected in accordance with the endorsed Tree Management Plan required by Condition 6 of this permit;

(f) Replacement of the Pin Oak in the front setback within a Gleditsia triacanthos that will reach a minimum height of 12m;

(g) A schedule of construction materials, external finishes and colours (including swatch samples);

(h) A Landscape Plan in accordance with Condition 3 of this permit; (i) A Tree Management Plan in accordance with Condition 6 of this permit; (j) A Waste Management Plan in accordance with Condition 25 of this permit;

______________________________________________________________________________________



(k) A Construction Management Plan in accordance with Condition 26 of this permit; and

(l) An Environmentally Sustainable Design Report in accordance with Condition 28 of this permit.

Layout not to be altered 2. The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and

works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason (unless the Boroondara Planning Scheme specifies that a permit is not required) without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

Landscape plan 3. A landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be

submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three (3) copies provided. When endorsed, the plan will form part of the permit. The landscape plan must be generally in accordance with the landscape concept plan dated 6/8/16 prepared by Craig Elderidge Design (LP01-4), and must show: (a) A survey (including botanical names) of all existing trees to be retained and of

those to be removed. The intended status of the trees shown on the landscape plan must be consistent with that depicted on the development layout plan;

(b) Details of the surface finish of all pathways, paved areas and accessways; (c) A planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers including

botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity and the quantities of each plant;

(d) The Pin Oak shown in the front setback of Dwelling E-02 replaced with a Gleditsia triacanthos that will reach a minimum height of 12m;

(e) No structures within 1.5m of the Gleditsia; (f) Specific details provided of all surfaces within 5m of the Gleditsia; (g) One (1) small tree in the secluded private open space of each dwelling; (h) Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site; and (i) Landscaping required by any other condition of this permit.

Completion of landscaping works 4. Landscaping as shown on the endorsed landscape plan/s must be carried out and

completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to the occupation of the development.

Landscaping maintenance 5. All landscaping works shown on the endorsed landscape plan/s must be

maintained and any dead, diseased or damaged plants replaced, all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

______________________________________________________________________________________



Tree Management Plan 6. Prior to the endorsement of the plans referred to in Condition 1 of this permit, a

Tree Management Plan must be submitted by a suitably qualified and experienced Arborist in relation to the management and maintenance of trees 19, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25 as detailed in the preliminary arboricultural assessment report, Julia Reynolds, 14 March 2016. The Tree Management Plan must be approved by the Responsible Authority prior to the commencement of any works including demolition and levelling of the site. The Tree Management Plan must make specific recommendations in accordance with the Australian Standard AS4970: 2009 - Protection of Trees on Development Sites and detail the following to the satisfaction of the responsible authority ensuring that the tree remains healthy and viable during construction. It must also include: (a) A tree protection plan to scale is to be submitted along with the tree

management plan that is to show: (b) All tree protection zones and structural root zones of trees to be retained, (c) All tree protection fenced off areas and areas where ground protection

systems will be used (d) Notation stating that the project arborist must supervise works within the Tree

Protection Zones. (e) All services to be located within the tree protection zone and a notation to

state that all services will either be located outside of the tree protection zone or bored under the tree protection zone; and

(f) A notation to refer to the tree management plan for specific detail on what actions are required within the tree protection zone.

(g) Details of how the root system of any tree to be retained will be managed. This must detail any initial non-destructive trenching if required, and pruning of any roots required to be undertaken by the project arborist.

(h) Supervision timetable and certification of tree management activities required by the Project Arborist to the satisfaction of the responsible authority;

(i) All remedial pruning works that are required to be performed on the tree development of the site. The pruning comments must reference Australian Standards 4373:2007, Pruning of Amenity Trees and a detailed photographic diagram specifying what pruning will occur.

The recommendations contained in the approved tree management plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Contractors to be advised of trees to be retained 7. The owner and occupier of the site must ensure that, prior to the commencement

of buildings and works, all contractors and tradespersons operating on the site are advised of the status of trees to be retained as detailed in the endorsed Tree Management Plan and are advised of any obligations in relation to the protection of those trees.

Regulation of activities in Tree Protection Area 8. No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within

the Tree Protection Area as detailed in the endorsed Tree Management Plan without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within the Tree Protection Zone.

______________________________________________________________________________________



Regulation of activities in Tree Protection Zone 9. No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within

the Tree Protection Zone as detailed in the endorsed arborist report without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within the Tree Protection Zone.

Drainage 10. The site must be drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Driveways and car parking areas to be constructed 11. Before the use starts or any building is occupied, area/s set aside for car parking,

access lanes and driveways shown on the endorsed plans must be: (a) Constructed; (b) Formed to such levels and properly drained so that they can be used in

accordance with the endorsed plans; (c) Surfaced with an all weather seal coat; (d) Line marked to indicate each car space; (e) Clearly marked to show the direction of traffic along the access lanes and

driveways; and (f) Drained

to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Number of car parking spaces 12. A minimum of 65 car parking spaces must be provided on the land, to the

satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Allocation of car parking spaces 13. A minimum of 5 independent visitor spaces must be clearly marked with

appropriate signage within the basement to indicate that they are available for the use of all visitors.

Use of car parking spaces 14. Car parking spaces shown on the endorsed plans must not be used for any

purpose other than the parking of vehicles, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Use of car parking spaces and driveways 15. Car spaces, access lanes and driveways shown on the endorsed plans must not

be used for any other purpose, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Visitor parking spaces 16. Visitor parking spaces within the development must be:

(a) Clearly identified by appropriate signage having an area no greater than 0.3m2;

(b) Line marked to indicate each car space; and (c) Available for visitor usage at all times.

______________________________________________________________________________________



Lighting of carparks and accessways 17. Low intensity lighting must be provided to ensure that car park areas and

pedestrian accessways are adequately illuminated without any unreasonable loss of amenity to the surrounding area, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Vehicle crossovers 18. Any new vehicle crossover or modification to an existing vehicle crossover must

be constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Removal of redundant vehicle crossovers 19. All disused or redundant vehicle crossovers must be removed and the area

reinstated with footpath, naturestrip, kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

External lighting 20. All external lighting must be designed, baffled and located so as to prevent light

from the site causing any unreasonable impacts on the locality, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Security alarms 21. All security alarms or similar devices installed on the land must be of a silent type

in accordance with any current standards published by Standards Australia International Ltd and must be connected to a registered security service, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Concealment of pipes 22. All pipes (except down-pipes), fixtures, fittings and vents servicing any building on

the site must be concealed in service ducts or otherwise hidden from external view, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Regular waste removal 23. All waste material not required for further on-site processing must be regularly

removed from the site. All vehicles removing waste must have fully secured and contained loads so that no wastes are spilled or dust or odour is created, to satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Maintenance of waste storage area 24. All bins and receptacles used for the collection and storage of solid waste,

recyclables and other wastes must be kept in a designated area, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. This storage area must be: (a) Properly paved and drained to a legal point of discharge; (b) Screened from view with a suitably designed enclosure; (c) Supplied with adequate hot and cold water; and (d) Maintained in a clean and tidy condition free from offensive odours


______________________________________________________________________________________



Hours for waste collection 25. Collection of waste must be conducted so as not to cause any unreasonable

disturbance to nearby residential properties and may only take place during the following times: Monday to Friday: 7:00am to 6:00pm Saturday & Public Holidays: 9:00am to 6:00pm Sunday: No collection allowed


Waste management plan 26. A waste management plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be

submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Once satisfactory, such plan will be endorsed and must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plan must provide the following details of a regular private waste (including recyclables) collection service for the subject land including: (a) the type/s and number of waste bins; (b) screening of bins; (c) type/size of trucks; (d) frequency of waste collection; (e) plan showing the layout of the bins at collection time including sufficient

clearances from all street services, features and infrastructure; and (f) delivery of bins to waste collection points and retrieval of bins once collected

or location of collection points within basement


Construction Management Plan 27. Prior to the commencement of any site works, including demolition and

excavation, a Construction Management Plan must be submitted to and endorsed by the Responsible Authority. No works are permitted to occur until the Plan has been endorsed by the Responsible Authority. Once endorsed, the construction management plan will form part of the permit and must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plan must be prepared in accordance with Council’s Construction Management Plan Template and provide details of the following: a) Hours for construction activity in accordance with any other condition of this

permit; b) Measures to control noise, dust, water and sediment laden runoff; c) Measures relating to removal of hazardous or dangerous material from the

site, where applicable; d) A plan showing the location of parking areas for construction and sub-

contractors' vehicles on and surrounding the site, to ensure that vehicles associated with construction activity cause minimum disruption to surrounding premises. Any basement car park on the land must be made available for use by sub-constructors/tradespersons upon completion of such areas, without delay;

______________________________________________________________________________________



e) A Traffic Management Plan showing truck routes to and from the site; f) Swept path analysis demonstrating the ability for trucks to enter and exit the

site in a safe manner for the largest anticipated truck associated with the construction;

g) A plan showing the location and design of a vehicle wash-down bay for construction vehicles on the site;

h) Measures to ensure that sub-contractors/tradespersons operating on the site are aware of the contents of the construction management plan;

i) Contact details of key construction site staff; j) A site plan showing the location of any site sheds, on-site amenities, building

waste storage and the like, noting that Council does not support site sheds on Council road reserves; and

k) Any other relevant matters, including the requirements of VicRoads and Yarra Trams.

Hours for demolition and construction 28. All works including earthworks, demolition and construction activity associated

with the approved development must take place only during the following hours, except with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority: Monday to Thursday: 7:00am to 6:30pm Friday: 7:00am to 5:00pm Saturday: 9:00am to 5:00pm Sunday & Public Holidays: No construction

Environmentally Sustainable Design Report 29 Concurrent with the submission of any plans pursuant to Condition 1, an

Environmentally Sustainable Design (ESD) Report that is to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be prepared by a suitably qualified expert and submitted to the Responsible Authority for approval. The report must address ESD principles proposed for the site including, but not limited to, energy efficiency, stormwater collection (for re-use in garden irrigation) and waste and building materials. Any recommended changes to the building must be incorporated into the plans required by Condition 1. Once approved, such a plan must be implemented prior to the occupation of the dwellings to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Provision of letter boxes 30. Provision must be made on the site for letter boxes and receptacles for papers to

the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Permit to expire: 31. This permit will expire if:

a) The development does not start within two (2) years of the issue date of this

permit; or b) The development is not completed within four (4) years of the issue date of

this permit.

______________________________________________________________________________________



The Responsible Authority may extend the times referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or:

a) within six (6) months afterwards if the development has not commenced; or b) within twelve (12) months afterwards if the development has not been

completed. Council and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal are unable to approve requests outside of the relevant time frame. Notes: Headings are for ease of reference only and do not affect the interpretation of permit conditions. This is not a Building Permit. A Building Permit may be required prior to the commencement of any works associated with the proposed development. Pursuant to Council's Residential Parking Permit Policy (2011), the owners and occupiers of dwellings approved in this development will not be eligible to obtain resident or visitor parking permits. The Residential Parking Permit Policy is available to download at http://www.boroondara.vic.gov.au/your_council/local-laws-policies/traffic . Alternatively please contact Council on 9278 4444. Prior to the commencement of any works on the site, the owner/developer must submit drainage plans for assessment and approval by the Responsible Authority (Asset Management). Stormwater drains are to be connected to a legal point of discharge approved by Council. Drainage Connections within a road reserve, right-of-way, parkland, within an easement or to a Health Act drain must be to Council’s standards. A Council Supervision Permit is required for this work. All fees and charges associated with the connection are to be borne by the applicant. Prior to the commencement of any works on the site, the owner / developer must submit any new vehicular crossover or modification or alteration to an existing crossover proposal for assessment and approval by the Responsible Authority (Asset Management). The Tree Protection Local Law requires that a Local Law Tree Permit be sought from Council for the removal and/or lopping of a 'Significant Tree' and/or excavation within the critical root zone of a Significant Tree. A list of Significant Trees is available at http://www.boroondara.vic.gov.au/our-city/trees/significant-trees. A Local Law Tree Permit is also required to remove, damage kill or destroy any identified 'Canopy Tree' which may include any excavation within the tree protection zone of a 'canopy tree'.

______________________________________________________________________________________



The Tree Protection Local Law identifies a 'Canopy tree' as any tree with a single trunk circumference of 110cm or a combined circumference of a multi stemmed tree of 110cm or greater measured at 1.5m above ground level. A Planning Permit does not constitute a Local Law Tree Permit or permission to remove, damage kill or destroy a significant or canopy tree. The Tree Protection Local Law is available to download at http://www.boroondara.vic.gov.au/our-city/trees/tree-works-permits alternatively please contact Council’s Arborist – Statutory Planning (telephone 9278 4888) should a Local Law Tree Permit be required. An Asset Protection Permit is required prior to the commencement of site works in accordance with Council’s Protection of Council Assets and Control of Building Sites Local Law 2011. Prior consent from Council and any and all public authorities is required to be obtained for alteration or reinstatement of assets or services affected as a result of the development. The full cost of reinstatement of any Council assets damaged as a result of demolition, building or construction works, must be met by the permit applicant or any other person responsible for such damage, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Discharge to the legal point of discharge will be allowed subject to the flow being limited to a rate equivalent to pre-development levels or less. Any additional discharge and / or runoff above the pre-development level is to be detained on site, via an approved storm water detention system. This matter should be discussed with Council’s Asset Management Department. Residents of the development approved by this permit will not be issued resident parking permits (including visitor parking permits). Document information

______________________________________________________________________________________



STATUTORY PLANNINGOFFICERS REPORTUrban Planning Committee

Application Number PP16/00974Date Application Received 09/09/2016Planning Officer Adam Haines

Applicant CHH Property Pty LtdOwner Mr RJ Bartlett, Mrs CC Bartlett

Property Address 2-4 Barenya Court, KewProposal Buildings and works to construct 25

dwellings over two lots including buildings and works over common property (4 Barenya Court)

Ward Cotham

Zoning General Residential Zone (Schedule 1)Overlays N/APotential Overland Flow? No

Advertised? YesNumber of Objections Received 86Recommendation Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning

Permit

TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONSAre VC110 transitional provisions applicable to this application?

Yes, the application was lodged prior to 27 March 2017.

PLANS ASSESSED IN THIS REPORTPlans advertised April 2017

Page 1 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



PROPOSAL

Appendix A - Plans

An application has been made to Council for buildings and works to construct 25 dwellings over two lots including buildings and works over common property (4 Barenya Court).

Details of the proposal are summarised as follows:-

The proposal is for a residential development consisting of 25 dwellings, comprising twenty-one townhouses and four apartments.The style of the development is a modern contemporary design using a flat parapet style roof form with materials including a combination of masonry and metal finishes as well as large glazed areas and externally fitted louvers.The development footprint is configured into four ‘blocks’ comprising a north, central, southern and western block as generally referred to in this report. The northern and central blocks are joined at the upper level (second floor) by a narrow glass corridor positioned generally over the main vehicle / pedestrian entry.The built form scale is predominantly three-storeys through the central and northern blocks, with the development having a maximum overall building height of 9.6m along the northern side of development. The majority (two thirds) of the western and southern block footprints is two-storey in scale, with the central footplate of these blocks increasing to a three-storey scale. Building site coverage totals 54% and permeable site coverage comprises 24% (76% impervious).The existing crossover from Barenya Court will be modified to a double-width crossover. The new widened crossover would measure 6.5m in width and leads to the basement level ramp access.A single level basement contains a total of sixty five (65) car spaces. Fifteen (15) of these spaces would be allocated to resident visitors and 50 spaces are allocated to residents. The plans show that two of the visitor spaces are for common use and are not allocated, with the remaining 13 visitor spaces proposed to be individually allocated to 13 of the townhouses. Each dwelling and has 3 bedrooms and therefore has 2 resident spaces allocated.There will be 13 sets of tandem spaces (for resident use).

Page 2 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Each of the 21 townhouse style dwellings is provided with a ground level courtyard for secluded private open space (SPOS). These SPOS areas range in size from 26.7sqm to 84sqm. These dwellings also have additional balconies provided at first floor level, which are generally less than 8sqm in area given they are additional areas. The four apartment style dwellings located on the second level have balconies provided for their secluded private open space. These balconies all have a minimum size of 8sqm and minimum width of 1.6mThe proposed development results in all on-site vegetation being removed. This includes canopy trees which require Local Law permission for their removal. These trees are noted and referenced as No. 1, 3, 3a, 3b, 3c, 6, 10, 13, 26 and 27 as detailed in the Arborist report by Julia Reynolds dated 14 March 2016 (see further Arborist comments on Page 15 of this report).

Minimum and maximum setbacks - March 2017 amended plans

Location of setbacks Proposed minimum and maximum building setbacks

North

(laneway and rear 144-146 and 142 Cotham Road)

South

(Rear 9 Doona Ave)

East

(Barenya Court and 1A Stirling Street)

West

(912, 5/190 and 6/190 Glenferrie Road)

Basement 1.76m-1.9m 2.7m 1.6m-4.18m 7.65m-8.21m

Ground floor 2.05m-3.0m 3.0m-4.0m 2.0m-4.5m 2.0m-4.5m

First floor 2.05m-2.06m 2.85m-3.0m 2.0m-4.1m 2.0m-4.23m

Second floor 4.0m-14.2m 5.76m 5.0m-14.0m 4.44m

Page 3 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



THE SITE

Appendix B - Locality Plan

The development site encompasses both No. 2 and No. 4 Barenya Court (subject site).The subject site is an irregular shaped allotment with a curved frontage to Barenya Court as a result of the court’s cul-de-sac configuration.

Page 4 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



The subject site has a total site area of 3,361 square metres.No. 2 Barenya Court is currently occupied with a single storey detached brick dwelling with a single crossover access leading to a concrete driveway located adjacent to the northern boundary.No. 4 Barenya Court is occupied with an existing double storey brick apartment building comprising a total of six ‘walk up’ flats fronting Barenya Court. No. 4 has two crossovers. The northern crossover extends along the northern boundary and wraps around the northern side of apartment building leading to alarge concrete car park at the rear of the apartments. A second crossover is positioned adjacent to the south-east corner frontage and accesses a brick garage in this location. The rear (west) section of the site is occupied by a communal tennis court and pool area which generally abuts the western boundary of the site.The site contains various canopy trees which are referenced as trees No. 1, 3, 3a, 3b, 3c, 6, 10, 13, 26 and 27 as detailed in the Arborist report by Julia Reynolds dated 14 March 2016. See Arborist Referral comments on of this report for additional details regarding the on-site trees.

THE SURROUNDING AREA

The area surrounding the subject site is varied in terms of the evident built form, the building scales as well as the different types of land use. The latter is invariably influenced by the Cotham Village Activity Centre which is located to immediate north / north-west. Two and three-storey residential apartment buildings are situated to the west fronting Glenferrie Road and various single and two-storey dwellings are located to the south and east.

North:A 3m wide laneway extends along the northern title boundary of No. 2 Barenya Court, which provides rear access to the commercial and mixed use developments fronting Cotham Road. These properties are located within the Cotham Village Neighbourhood Activity Centre, which generally occupies the south-eastern corner of the Cotham Road and Glenferrie Road intersection. The recently completed mixed-use development at No. 140-142 Cotham Road contains a four-storey building which interfaces with the north-west corner of the subject site. The building has a contemporary form with a flat roof profile concealed behind parapets as generally noted in the image below.

Page 5 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________


City of Boroondara 2 & 4 Barenya Court Kew Page 15 of 88

No. 140-142 Cotham Road

Further east from No. 140-142 Cotham Road and directly north of the subject site are Nos. 144-150 Cotham Road, all of which contain two-storey commercial buildings fronting Cotham Road. The area to the rear of these buildings is generally set aside as informal car parking (see images below), with access from the intervening laneway which separates the subject site from the rear boundary of these properties.

Page 6 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Nos. 144 - 150 Cotham Road

Rear of Nos. 144 - 150 Cotham Road

Page 7 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



East:Barenya Court is occupied by a total of four properties, two of which (Nos. 2 & 4) are part of the subject site. The remaining two properties on the eastern side of Barenya Court (Nos. 1 & 3) each contain single storey dwellings constructed from brick with pitched tile roofs (see below).

Nos. 1 & 3 Barenya Court (East)

The pedestrian laneway between the subject site (right image) and the rear of No. 1a Stirling Street (left image)

The southern end of Barenya Court includes a pedestrian walkway connecting to Stirling Street and Donna Avenue to the south (noted above). The pedestrian walkway

Laneway

Page 8 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



extends between the eastern boundary of the subject site and No. 1A Stirling Street, which does not interface with Barenya Court. No. 1A Stirling Street is also located within the Heritage Overlay (HO150).

No. 1a Stirling Street

South:Adjoining the southern boundary of the subject site is No. 9 Doona Avenue which contains a double storey Victorian dwelling fronting the dog-leg intersection of Doona Avenue and Stirling Street. The main private open space for this dwelling is located at the rear of the residence and interfaces with the southern common boundary of the subject site. This associated area of secluded private open space exceeds 300 square metres in total area. No. 9 Doona Avenue is also located within the Heritage Overlay (HO150).

Page 9 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



No. 9 Doona Avenue

South-West:To the west of No. 9 Doona Avenue abutting the south-west corner of the subject site is Unit 5 of No. 910 Glenferrie Road. This unit is one of ten single storey units which front Glenferrie Road. The main private open space area for this unit is situated in two parts, one of which in the north-east (24sqm) and a second area in the north-west corner (25sqm). Both of these areas abut the boundary in common with the subject site (see below).

Page 10 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



The interface with the subject site and Unit 5/910 Glenferrie Road

WestAdjoining the western boundary is No. 912 Glenferrie Road. This site comprises three individual apartment buildings. The apartment building situated within the rear (eastern) section of this site abutting the boundary in common is a part two, part three-storey building.

Subject site (red)

SPOS (green)

Unit 5/910it 5/910

SPOS (green)

Page 11 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



The area occupying the space between the eastern wall of the neighbouring apartment building and the boundary with the subject site (see below) is an area of secluded private open space.

RESTRICTIVE COVENANT/AGREEMENTS

No covenant or restriction has been registered on Title for this property.

ABORIGINAL CULTURAL HERITAGE

Is the site within an area of Aboriginal cultural heritage sensitivity?

No

Subject site

Rear apartment building No 912 Glenferrie Road

SPOS (green)

Page 12 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



PERMIT/SITE HISTORY

A review of Council records indicates that there have been no previous planning applications at the subject site.

NOTICE OF APPLICATION

Pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987, the application was advertised by:-

Sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land; andPlacing sign/s on the land for a period of 14 days.

OBJECTIONS RECEIVED?

Eighty-six (86) objections have been received to the proposal. The grounds of objection are summarised as follows:-

Overdevelopment of the site;Overlooking of the properties to the west of the site;Loss of established trees;Overshadowing of private open spaces to the west;Adverse impacts on neighbourhood character;Lack of visitor car parking;Traffic congestion given the court location;Demolition of the existing building, which has heritage value;Amenity and traffic Impacts during construction;Impact on existing infrastructure;Inappropriate three storey height; and Visual bulk to surrounding properties.

AMENDMENTS TO THE PROPOSAL

An amendment to a planning application was lodged with Council after notification on 16 March 2017. The proposed changes are summarised as follows:-

Reduce the number of dwellings from 27 to 25;

Page 13 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



The basement level setback 1.7 metres from the eastern boundary (adjacent to the pedestrian walkway), where it was abutting the boundary.Subsequent internal rearrangements to the basement layout.The southern block adjacent to the southern boundary reduced from seven (7) dwellings to six (6), with the building separated into three separate forms with the incorporation of internal setbacks of between 2.1 – 2.2 metres.The proposed fence on the eastern side of the shared landscape zone has been altered from a stone cladding to a visually permeable aluminium blade fencing to permit views from the street to the central landscaped areas.The proposed front fence height has been lowered from 1.8 to 1.5 metres.Dwelling A-05 has been deleted from the central block, with an 8.4 metre internal setback resulting in the separation from the northern and central blocks at Level 01.Alteration of the planting within the central landscape area and planting in the front setback.The provision of a glazed pedestrian bridge at Level 02 which connects the northern and central built forms.Compliance with the car parking requirements at Clause 52.06-5 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme.

The new development plans were formally re-advertised to all adjoining owners and occupiers and all objectors in April 2017. No objections were withdrawn.

Attachment CA further amended plan (Attachment C) was submitted to Council on 5 May 2017 to address the concerns raised with potential overshadowing to 5/910 Glenferrie Road. This plan includes the lowering in height of Dwelling W-06, adjacent to the western boundary of the subject site. This plan was circulated to the owner of 5/190 Glenferrie Road. The change to the height of Dwelling W-06 is recommended as a condition of any permit issued.

Page 14 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



INTERNAL REFERRALS

The application was referred to the following:-

Arborist

Discussion/ Notes:Trees within the site Trees; 2, 3d, 3e, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 28 are all below the Local Law threshold and therefore no permit is required for their removal.Trees; 1, 3a, 3b, 3c and 10 are small trees in fair - poor condition. These are of low landscape value and do not warrant retention. Trees 6 and 13 are the largest trees within the site. They are both in fair structural condition with co-dominant trunks with tight unions between the main stems. Both trees also have twig dieback widespread throughout their canopies, indicating that they are in decline. Although these are large trees they do not warrant retention due to their health and structural condition. Therefore they should be removed, however because of their size and value there must be sufficient space for suitable replacement trees within the new development. The central landscaped area is sufficient for the species of trees shown in the amended plans. The Pin Oak tree located in the front setback of Dwelling E-02 should be replaced with a more suitable species. A Gleditsia triacanthos should be provided instead. Trees 26 and 27 are small trees in poor condition due to previous poor pruning. Therefore their removal would be approved.Neighbouring treesTrees 19, 22, 23, 24 and 25 are unlikely to be impacted by the proposed development. However as the assessments of these trees are based on estimates, and the trees are growing in highly modified environments, the project arborist must supervise all earthworks and excavations within the Tree Protection Zones (TPZ) of these trees.Tree 19 has an estimated DBH: 45cm (TPZ: 5.4m radius), which larger than what is listed in the arborist report. The only the basement and associated cut is within the Tree Protection Zone of this tree, and the encroachment is less than 10%. However the plans must be updated with the larger TPZ.

Page 15 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Site Photos:

Tree 6 Tree 13

Proposal supported? Yes (No changes required) Yes (with changes) No Further Info Required (see Below) Design Change Required

Conditions: Required Not applicable

Please include the following conditions:Amended plans required 1. Before the development starts, amended plans must be submitted to the satisfaction

of the Responsible Authority. When the plans are to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority they will be endorsed and will then form part of the Permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three (3) copies provided, substantially in accordance with the plans submitted with the application, but modified to show:

Page 16 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



a) The Tree Protection Zones of trees 19 (TPZ: 5.4m radius), 22, 23, 24 and 25 as detailed in the preliminary arboricultural assessment report, Julia Reynolds, 14 March 2016, drawn on all site and floor plans;

b) Notation on all site and floor plans that trees 19, 22, 23, 24 and 25 are to be retained and protected in accordance with the endorsed Tree Management Plan required by Condition 6 of this permit;

c) Replacement of the Pin Oak in the front setback with a Gleditsia triacanthos that will reach a minimum of 12m;

d) No structures within 1.5m of the Gleditsia;e) Specific details provided of all surfaces within 5m of the Gleditsia, and how they

will be designed to accommodate root growth;f) A Tree Management Plan in accordance with Condition 6 of this permit.

Layout not to be altered 2. The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and works

shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason (unless the Boroondara Planning Scheme specifies that a permit is not required) without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

Landscape plan3. A landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to

and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three (3) copies provided. When endorsed, the plan will form part of the permit. The landscape plan must show:

a) A survey (including botanical names) of all existing trees to be retained and of those to be removed. The intended status of the trees shown on the landscape plan must be consistent with that depicted on the development layout plan;

b) Details of the surface finish of all pathways, paved areas and accessways;c) A planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers including

botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity and the quantities of each plant;

d) One (1) large canopy tree with a mature height of at least 15 and mature width of at least 8m (minimum two metres tall when planted) in the central green space and one (1) small tree in the secluded private open space of each dwelling;

e) Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site; andf) Landscaping required by any other condition of this permit.

Completion of landscaping works4. Landscaping as shown on the endorsed landscape plan/s must be carried out and

completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to the occupation of

Page 17 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



the development.

Landscaping maintenance5. All landscaping works shown on the endorsed landscape plan/s must be maintained

and any dead, diseased or damaged plants replaced, all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Tree management plan6. Prior to the endorsement of the plans referred to in Condition 1 of this permit, a Tree

Management Plan must be submitted by a suitably qualified and experienced Arborist in relation to the management and maintenance of trees 19, 22, 23, 24 and 25 as detailed in the preliminary arboricultural assessment report, Julia Reynolds, 14 March 2016. The Tree Management Plan must be approved by the Responsible Authority prior to the commencement of any works including demolition and levelling of the site. The Tree Management Plan must make specific recommendations in accordance with the Australian Standard AS4970: 2009 - Protection of Trees on Development Sites and detail the following to the satisfaction of the responsible authority ensuring that the tree remains healthy and viable during construction. It must also include:

a) A tree protection plan to scale is to be submitted along with the tree management plan that is to show:

I. All tree protection zones and structural root zones of trees to be retained, II. All tree protection fenced off areas and areas where ground protection systems

will be usedIII. Notation stating that the project arborist must supervise works within the Tree

Protection Zones.IV. All services to be located within the tree protection zone and a notation to state

that all services will either be located outside of the tree protection zone or bored under the tree protection zone; and

V. A notation to refer to the tree management plan for specific detail on what actions are required within the tree protection zone.

b) Details of how the root system of any tree to be retained will be managed. Thismust detail any initial non-destructive trenching if required, and pruning of any roots required to be undertaken by the project arborist.

c) Supervision timetable and certification of tree management activities required by the Project Arborist to the satisfaction of the responsible authority;

d) All remedial pruning works that are required to be performed on the tree development of the site. The pruning comments must reference Australian

Page 18 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Standards 4373:2007, Pruning of Amenity Trees and a detailed photographic diagram specifying what pruning will occur.

e) The recommendations contained in the approved tree management plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Contractors to be advised of trees to be retained7. The owner and occupier of the site must ensure that, prior to the commencement of

buildings and works, all contractors and tradespersons operating on the site are advised of the status of trees to be retained as detailed in the endorsed Tree Management Plan and are advised of any obligations in relation to the protection of those trees.

Regulation of activities in Tree Protection Area8. No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within the

Tree Protection Area as detailed in the endorsed Tree Management Plan without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within the Tree Protection Zone.

Officer Comment

The above permit conditions are included within the Officer’s Recommendation.

Urban Design

17 March 2017

Following our comments on the original set of plans, a number of design iterations and discussions were had with the architects and planning consultants to reach a design outcome that would be acceptable.

The latest version of the plans reflects the discussions and suggestions made by Council officers to the architects to rectify the issues raised on the first set of plans. The changes have brought about some improvements to the proposal, the most notable are:

1. The continuity of the visual mass and bulk as viewed from Barenya Court was of concern, especially as the upper levels of Building A had extended over to connect with Building E. The extension over the gap between the two buildings has now decreased to a mere link that bridges over and connects the two buildings on the top level. The light weight, fully glazed bridge is deeply set in, which gives it a lighter and more

Page 19 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



recessive appearance while strengthening the visual break between the two buildings and allowing the development to present as three separate volumes/modules to Barenya Court.

2. Splitting the southern row of terraces into three sets (pairs) of duplexes with breaks between each two is an improvement that resulted from the deletion of a dwelling from this row. The gaps have considerably enhanced the visual mass and appearance of this row within the development and from adjacent southern properties.

3. The addition of trees and deep soil planting where possible and the careful design and management of the open spaces within the development has enhanced the scheme. This has been attained through a multi-layered landscape system and a clear hierarchical structure of spaces, from communal to private, should provide a good level of amenity for external and internal living spaces and enhance the visual quality of the development as a whole. This has been complemented by a lightweight and highly transparent fencing along the street edge to allow for visual permeability from the street to the development, in particular revealing the central landscaped area that acts as the heart of the development. The exposed sidewalls of Buildings A and E have been treated creatively to function as green walls, which should enhance their visual interest.

4. The design has also been refined to address the issue we raised regarding visual unity/consistency versus variety and richness in any new development. The proposed terrace form has now been complemented by a greater variation in façade alignment and materiality. The materials palette incorporates a range of quality finishes, which should ensure a visually pleasing building form. The adoption of a few stone tones to differentiate the buildings is acknowledged, but its limited application to certain facades is questioned. Ideally, the rear and side elevations should also incorporate some stone cladding to enhance their visual quality and tie the whole development together visually. A physical sample board should be submitted for Council’s final approval and should demonstrate the high quality and longevity of the finishes selected, which can be addressed via a permit condition.

Officer Comment

The requirement for additional stone tones to the rear and side elevations along with the requirement for a physical sample board will be included as recommended permit conditions.

Traffic & Transport Department - Traffic Engineers

ON-SITE PARKING PROVISION

Page 20 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



DESCRIPTION (USE)

SIZE CAR PARKING RATE CAR PARKING

REQUIREMENT ON-SITE PARKING

PROVISION

25 x Dwelling three-bedroom 2 space per dwelling 50 50

Visitor 25 dwellings 1 space/ 5 dwellings 5 15

TOTAL 55 65

DESCRIPTION (USE)

SIZE BICYCLE PARKING

RATE BICYCLE PARKING

REQUIREMENT ON-SITE PARKING

PROVISION

Resident 27 dwellings 1 per 5 dwellings (if 4 storeys or more)

5 4

Visitors 27 dwellings 1 per 10 dwellings (if 4 storeys or more)

3 4

TOTAL 8 8

SATISFIED PARKING ASSESSMENT ELEMENT

YES NO

X In accordance with Statutory Requirements

N/A Waiver of long-term (eg. staff, resident) parking

N/A Waiver of short-term (eg. visitor, customer) parking

X Submission of empirical data - including Parking Demand and Occupancy surveys

COMMENTS

The provision of 50 on-site parking spaces (provided within the basement car park) for residents and 15 spaces for visitors satisfies the statutory requirement for resident car parking spaces and exceeds the requirement for residential visitor parking spaces in accordance with Clause 52.06. However, in terms of the visitor parking provision, it is intended that the 13 visitor parking spaces are to be designated to 13 of the dwellings, given the proposed tandem parking arrangement and adjacent visitor parking space configuration within the basement car park. This results in a excess of visitor parking associated with these 12 dwellings. The remaining 12 dwellings are provided with two shared visitor parking spaces, which ultimately satisfies the requirement in accordance

Page 21 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



with Clause 52.06. Parking occupancy data in the vicinity indicates that there is adequate spare public parking capacity in the vicinity of the site to accommodate any additional parking demands. Under Council’s Residential Parking Permit Policy (2011), residents of the development will not be eligible for resident or visitor parking permits.

CAR PARK LAYOUT/DESIGN

SATISFIED PARKING ASSESSMENT ELEMENT

YES NO

Parking Spaces/Garages

X Dimensions in accordance with Clause 52.06 or AS/NZS2890.1-2004

X Electronic swept path assessment provided to demonstrate satisfactory access

COMMENTS

Dimensions for all the parking spaces within the basement car park are in accordance with Clause 52.06 and/or AS/NZS2890.1-2004, noting that there are a number of tandem parking spaces proposed. Each of these tandem spaces have been lengthened by 500mm, in accordance with Clause 52.06 and are allocated to individual dwellings, which is acceptable. Checks with manual turning templates of relevant basement parking spaces indicate that vehicles may access the spaces in a forwards direction and egress the site in a forwards direction. It is noted that some spaces may require multiple manoeuvres to achieve access. It is stated in AS/NZS2890.1-2004 that it is permissible for multiple manoeuvres to be undertaken to access long-term or resident parking. Furthermore, residents would likely become familiar with these type of access movements and would be aware of these access arrangements. Accordingly, on this basis, the manoeuvrability to/from these spaces is considered acceptable in this instance.

Access Aisles

Dimensions in accordance with Clause 52.06 or AS/NZS2890.1-2004

Electronic swept path assessment provided to demonstrate satisfactory access

Provision of 1m aisle extension for blind aisle in basement car park

COMMENTS

Internal basement access aisles are designed in accordance with Clause 52.06. The basement access ramp maintains a minimum wall-to-wall width of 6.6m in accordance with

Page 22 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Clause 52.06 and AS/NZS2890.1-2004, allowing simultaneous two-way entry and exit movements.

Access Ramps

Ramp width and design in accordance with Clause 52.06 or AS/NZS2890.1-2004

Ramp grades in accordance with Clause 52.06 or AS/NZS2890.1-2004

Electronic swept path assessment demonstrating satisfactory simultaneous access

COMMENTS

The ramp grade of 1:10 for the first 5m, followed by a transition of 1:4.5 for 2m, 1:4 for 5.5m and a further transition of 1:8 for 2m, complies with the requirement of Clause 52.06. Construction of the proposed modified crossover to the site must be undertaken to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

Headroom


COMMENTS

A minimum height clearance of 2.3m is provided at the entrance and within the basement car park.

Pedestrian Sight Triangles


Fences or obstructions restricted to a height of 900mm or made to be 50% permeable to maintain visibility to pedestrians

COMMENTS

Pedestrian sight triangles are provided in accordance with Clause 52.06 or AS/NZS2890.1-2004. It is noted It is imperative that any vegetation on either side of the site access is maintained to a height of 900mm to maintain visibility to pedestrians.

LOADING REQUIREMENTS

SATISFIED LOADING ASSESSMENT ELEMENT

YES NO

N/A N/A Dimensions of on-site loading area in accordance with Clause 52.06

N/A N/A Suitable justification for not providing an on-site loading facility

Page 23 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



COMMENTS

N/A

WASTE COLLECTION

SATISFIED WASTE COLLECTION ASSESSMENT ELEMENT

YES NO

Identification of waste collection method (Council/Private Contractor)

Demonstration of suitable on-site access and manoeuvrability (if required)

COMMENTS

It is indicated within the traffic report that the development is to utilise a private contractor to undertake waste collection within the basement. Swept path analysis of the waste collection indicates that the nominated vehicle may achieve suitable access to/from the basement car park, subject to the resolution of the above height clearance concerns.

TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT

DESCRIPTION (USE)

SIZE DESIGN GENERATION RATES TRAFFIC GENERATION ESTIMATES

PEAK HOUR DAILY PEAK HOUR DAILY

Residential 25 x 3-BR dwelling

0.6/dwelling 6/dwelling 15 150

TOTAL 15 150

COUNCIL OBTAINED TRAFFIC DATA

STREET DATE ROAD

TYPE(CAPACITY) DAILY TRAFFIC

VOLUME

Barenya Court, Kew - Local Road -

PROVIDED TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT ELEMENT

YES NO

X Existing traffic volume data for adjacent street

Page 24 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



X Anticipated traffic generation of the proposed development to be accommodated within the surrounding road network

X Submission of traffic modelling data to justify anticipated traffic generation

COMMENTS

Barenya Court is classified as a Local Road within the Boroondara Road Hierarchy.

No traffic data has been submitted by the applicant for the current traffic volume along Barenya Court. A review of Barenya Court indicates that it is accessed directly from Cotham Road and does not provide through access to the wider local road network. Accordingly, it is reasonable that the existing traffic volumes on the street would likely be generated by local traffic only. Based on a first principles analysis, on review of the number of dwellings in Barenya Court, it is estimated that the existing traffic volumes may be in the range of 200-300 vehicles per day.

Overall, 150 trips per day have been estimated by Traffic Engineering for the proposed development including 16 trips in each of the AM and PM peak periods. There are currently a total of 7 dwellings on the subject site. The proposed development results in an anticipated increase of 108 daily vehicle movements within Barenya Court compared with existing traffic volumes.

The applicant has undertaken gap analysis at the intersection of Barenya Court and Cotham Road during morning and afternoon peak periods which indicates that there is more than adequate spare capacity to accommodate the anticipated increase in traffic as a result of this development during these periods.

Whilst it is acknowledged that this is a significant increase in traffic, it is anticipated that the post-development traffic volume in Barenya Court will not exceed the acceptable range for a local road (typically up to 2,000 vehicles per day).

Accordingly, it is considered that this level of traffic generation can be accommodated within the surrounding road network without significant impact.

Officer Comment

The proposal has the support of Council’s Traffic Engineers and matters raised can be dealt with by conditions. A recommended permit condition addresses the allocation of visitor spaces within the basement, to ensure they are available for the use of all resident visitors and not located within tandem spaces.

Page 25 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Infrastructure

EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PROPOSAL YES NO N/A Is the proposed crossover 2 metres or greater away from the base of a street tree? Comment:

Is the proposed crossover 1 metre or greater away from any power pole? Comment: There are no street assets that will require relocation due to the proposed crossover Comment: Maintain minimum 600mm clearance from MMBW inspection pit Alternatively, modify existing inspection pit to accept vehicle loads and / or relocate clear of crossover Maintain minimum 600mm clearance from Telstra pit Alternatively, modify existing Telstra pit to accept vehicle loads and / or relocate clear of crossover

Is there an existing redundant crossover(s) which will require removal? Comment: Redundant crossovers to be removed and street assets reinstated.

Is the crossover width(s) acceptable? Comment: - 6.0m

Is the distance of the crossover from an intersection/traffic lights or school crossing acceptable? Comment:

Is the separation between the proposed crossovers acceptable? Comment: Is the separation between the crossover and the crossover of the adjoining properties acceptable? (ie space for 1 car at 5.5 metres, or 2 cars at 11 metres). Comment:

STANDARD CONDITIONS REQUIRED FOR PLANNING PERMIT The width of the proposed crossover servicing the development to be 6.0 metres. Any new vehicle crossover or modification to an existing vehicle crossover must be constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. All disused or redundant vehicle crossovers must be removed and the area reinstated with footpath, naturestrip, kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Other:

Comment:

Page 26 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



STANDARD NOTES REQUIRED FOR PLANNING PERMIT

Prior to the commencement of any works on the site, the owner / developer must submit any new vehicular crossover or modification or alteration to an existing crossover proposal for assessment and approval by the Responsible Authority (Asset Management Department). An Asset Protection Permit is required prior to the commencement of site works in accordance with Council’s Protection of Council Assets and Control of Building Sites Local Law 2011. Prior consent from Council and any and all public authorities is required to be obtained for alteration or reinstatement of assets or services affected as a result of the development The full cost of reinstatement of any Council assets damaged as a result of demolition, building or construction works, must be met by the permit applicant or any other person responsible for such damage, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The applicant is required to obtain prior written consent from Council and any and all Public Authorities for alteration or reinstatement of (street) assets or services affected as a result of the development. Full compliance with any and all conditions is required. The applicant must provide copies of said written approvals / agreements to Council’s Asset Management Department. All costs are to be borne by the developer.

Comment: SUMMARY

The application is supported. The application is not supported.

Comment: Maintain minimum 600mm clearance from MMBW inspection pit. Alternatively, modify existing inspection pit to accept vehicle loads and / or relocate clear of crossover Maintain minimum 600mm clearance from Telstra pit Alternatively, modify existing Telstra pit to accept vehicle loads and / or relocate clear of crossover Redundant crossovers to be removed and street assets reinstated. All vehicles leaving the basement garage to manoeuvre on site in order to exit to Barenya Court in a forward direction.

Page 27 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Officer Comment

The proposal has the support of Council’s Asset’s Department. Standard conditions and permit notes can address the matters raised.

Waste Management

The WMP is satisfactory for private waste collections for both the townhouses and apartments.

Officer Comment

The proposal has the support of Council’s Waste Management Department.

Strategic Planning

Thank you for referring the application/inquiry for 4 Barenya Court, Kew to the Strategic Planning Department for comment.

The property is on Council's list of possible heritage sites and, therefore, was referred to Council's Heritage Consultant for comment.

Council's Heritage Consultant has advised that the property is not of individual heritage significance.

Consequently, Strategic Planning will not be pursuing heritage controls for the property.

Officer commentThe above comments are noted.

GOVERNANCE ISSUES

The implications of this report have been assessed and are not considered likely to breach or infringe upon the human rights contained in the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.

Page 28 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



The officers responsible for this report have no direct or indirect interests requiring disclosure.

CONSIDERATIONS

In assessing this application, consideration has been given to the following:-

The objectives of planning in Victoria as detailed in Section 4 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987;Section 60 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987;The relevant provisions and decision guidelines of the Boroondara Planning Scheme including the decision guidelines of Clause 65; andThe objections received.

This proposal does not raise any significant adverse social or economic impacts.General social and economic impacts are addressed by the planning policy assessment below.

BOROONDARA PLANNING SCHEME

ZONING & OVERLAYSAppendix D - Zoning Map

The purpose of the zone will be discussed in the “Officer Assessment” section of the report.

General Residential Zone (GRZ)

Pursuant to Clause 32.08-6 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme, a permit is required to:

Construct two or more dwellings on a lot;Construct or extend a dwelling if it is on common property;

A permit is required to construct or extend a front fence within 3 metres of the street if:

The fence is associated with 2 or more dwellings on a lot or a residential building;

Page 29 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



A development must meet the requirements of Clause 55. This does not apply to a development of five or more storeys, excluding a basement.

Maximum Building Height

Pursuant to Clause 32.08-9, a building must not be constructed for use as a dwelling or a residential building that:

exceeds the maximum building height specified in a schedule to this zone; orcontains more than the maximum number of storeys specified in a schedule to this zone.

If no maximum building height or maximum number of storeys is specified in a schedule to this zone:

the building height must not exceed 11 metres; andthe building must contain no more than 3 storeys at any point.

Maximum Building Height Max Number of StoreysGRZ1 A building used as a dwelling or a

residential building must not exceed a height of 9 metres unless the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case it must not exceed a height of 10 metres. (Specified in schedule)

The building must contain no more than 3 storeys at any point.

Transitional provisions

The minimum garden area requirement of Clause 32.08-4 and the maximum buildingheight and number of storeys requirements of Clause 32.08-9 introduced by Amendment VC110 do not apply to planning permit application for the construction or

Page 30 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



extension of a dwelling or residential building lodged before the approval date of Amendment VC110.

Officer Comment

Notwithstanding that the application enjoys transitional provisions, the proposal complies with Clause 32.08-9. It presents no more than 3 storeys and has a maximum height of 10m, which is permitted given the slope of the land. The proposed development also provides more than 35% garden area, which complies with the new requirements if they were to apply to this application.

PARTICULAR PROVISIONS

Clause 55 - Two or More Dwellings on a Lot and Residential Buildings

Clause 55 (ResCode) is applicable to the assessment of this application.

Clause 52.06 - Car Parking

Pursuant to Clause 52.06-2 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme, prior to a new use commencing or a new building being occupied or the floor or site area of an existing use being increased or the number of patrons, seats or practitioners at an existing use being increased, the car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided on the land or as approved under Clause 52.06-3 to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

Pursuant to Clause 52.06-3, unless a schedule to the Parking Overlay or the schedule to Clause 52.06-1 specifies otherwise, a permit is required to :

Reduce (including reduce to zero) the requirement to provide the number of car parking spaces required under this clause,Allow some or all of the required number of car parking spaces to be provided on another site,Provide more than a maximum parking provision specified in a schedule to the Parking Overlay.

The Table 1 at Clause 52.06-5, sets out the number of car parking spaces required for a use.

Page 31 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Extract of Table 1 at Clause 52.06-5Use "Column A" Car

Parking Rate"Column C" Car Parking

MeasureDwelling 1 To each one or two bedroom

dwelling, plus2 To each three or more bedroom

dwelling (with studies or studios that are separate rooms counted as a bedrooms) plus

1 For visitors to every 5 dwellings for developments of 5 or more dwellings

Officer Comment

The proposal complies with the relevant parking rate in the Planning Scheme. No reduction in car parking is being sought.

OFFICER ASSESSMENT

STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

The following State policies are relevant to the assessment of the current application:-

Clause 9 - Plan Melbourne 2017-2050: Metropolitan Planning Strategy (Department of Environment, Land Water and Planning, 2017).Clause 11 - SettlementClause 15 - Built Environment & HeritageClause 16 – HousingClause 18 - TransportClause 19 - Infrastructure

Plan Melbourne 2017-2050: Metropolitan Planning Strategy (Department of Environment, Land Water and Planning, 2017) is a long-term plan designed to respond to the state-wide, regional and local challenges and opportunities Victoria faces between now and 2050.

Page 32 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Clause 11 has been restructured, making policy neutral updates and administrative changes. Of relevance to this application, strategies to achieve the objective of providing “housing choice close to jobs and services” (Clause 11.06-2 - Housing choice), include to:-

Manage the supply of new housing in locations that will meet population growth and create a sustainable city.Maintain a permanent urban growth boundary around Melbourne to create a more consolidated, sustainable city.Facilitate increased housing in the established areas to create a city of 20 minute neighbourhoods close to existing services, jobs and public transport.Support housing growth and diversity in defined housing change areas and redevelopment sites.Direct new housing to areas with appropriate infrastructure.Allow for a spectrum of minimal, incremental and high change residential areas that balance the need to protect valued areas with the need to ensure choice and growth in housing.Provide certainty about the scale of growth in the suburbs by prescribing appropriate height and site coverage provisions for different areas.Deliver more housing closer to jobs and public transport.Support new housing in activity centres and other places that offer good access to jobs, services and public transport.Facilitate development that increases the supply of affordable and social housing in suburbs across Melbourne.Facilitate diverse housing that offers choice and meets changing household needs through:-

provision of a greater mix of housing types.adaptable internal dwelling design.universal design.

The subject site has convenient access to community facilities:

Tram routes 23, 42, 109 are located 20m to the north.Cotham Village Activity Centre immediately north.Kew Junction Major Activity Centre located 650m to the west.

Page 33 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Sacred Heart Primary School located 120m to the west.Alexandra Gardens located 600m to the west.

The proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the broad urban consolidation, energy efficiency and medium density housing objectives outlined in the relevant Clauses of the State Planning Policy Framework.

Furthermore, the proposal is considered to respect the character of the surrounding area and contributes appropriately to the streetscape and public realm. This is discussed further in this report.

LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

The following Local policies are relevant to the assessment of the current application:-

Clause 22.07 - Neighbourhood Character Policy

Clause 22.07 - Neighbourhood Character Policy

Council's Neighbourhood Character Policy seeks to "encourage design solutions which enhance and respond positively to the existing neighbourhood character of residential areas in the City". The following table identifies the relevant neighbourhood character statement.

Precinct Number 16(Extract from the Neighbourhood Character Precinct Statement)

Description

Precinct 16 is bounded by Cotham Road to the north and Barkers Road to the south. This moderately sized precinct is situated on slightly sloping land in Kew and contains several schools such as Xavier College, Methodist Ladies’ College, Ruyton Girls’ School and Carey Baptist Grammar School. The precinct also adjoins Alexandra Gardens.

A large portion of the precinct is located within the Glenferrie Hill heritage overlay area (HO150) which contains a high number of Victorian dwellings. There is also a small area in the north-west of the precinct which is proposed for heritage protection. The precinct contains a variety of Federation, interwar, post war and contemporary dwellings.

Page 34 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Most dwellings are single storey, however some taller buildings are present, generally in the form of upper level additions. The scale varies in streets adjoining school buildings which have a more eclectic feel.

Lot frontages range between 5m to 10m for the Victorian cottages to 10 to 20m for some of the later dwellings. Front setbacks are generally 5 to 9m, however smaller setbacks are also present in some streets. Building and roof materials vary. Where on-site car parking exists, its location varies from house to house.

Front fences are generally low to medium in height. While most houses are detached, side setbacks are often narrow. Some houses are built to the boundary on one side.

The size and number of street trees varies from large canopy trees in some streets to more recent plantings. Front and rear gardens are small, however mature vegetation is common.

The generally narrow front setbacks, close spacing of houses and historic dwellings creates a suburban, historic character.

Design Guidelines

The following “Design Response” contained within the Design Guidelines providedirection for new buildings which ensures future development assists in achieving the area’s preferred character.

VegetationDesign Response

Ensure the retention of large trees.Ensure front gardens incorporate soft landscaping that complements thestreetscape.

Page 35 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Officer Comment

As noted in the arborist referral comments, the existing on-site vegetation is suitable for removal given the small size of the majority of the vegetation and the poor structure of the larger canopy trees. Subject to conditions of any permit issued, the proposed landscaping will adequately respond to the landscape character of the surrounding area. The proposal includes deep soil planting though the central and periphery areas of the site, which is considered to be a positive aspect of the proposed development. The central area will provide for the planting of 4 trees. It is noted that this area includes a ‘cut out’ that extends through the basement in order to provide adequate deep soil planting.

The proposed landscaping scheme has a focus on the periphery of the site and includes large concentrations of trees with mature heights of between 6.0m and 15.0m, which would significantly improve the landscaping conditions and would provide a verdant buffer to neighbouring residential properties that would invariably soften the built form outcome over time.

The Barenya Court interface includes landscaping strips directly along the footpath edge which would support a variety of vegetation, from shrubs up to canopy trees between 6.0m and 15m in height. This will invariably improve the streetscape interface as well as serve to conceal private open space areas abutting the site frontage.

The central area of the site would become a communal landscape area which would include new canopy trees in deep soil planters as well as a deep soil planted green wall configuration extending up from the basement level.

The species selected have been verified by Council’s Arborist as being suitable to fully utilise the available deep soil volumes which have been provided by the basement setbacks through the periphery of the site as well as the central void. This will ensure that the trees and plants are viable and able to generally reach their maximum growth capacity as detailed in the landscape design. A condition of any permit issued requires the replacement of the Pin Oak shown within the front setback of Dwelling E-02 with a Gleditsia triacanthos. This is considered to be a more suitable species in this location.

In total, 79 trees with a mature height of 6.0m or greater would be incorporated back into the subject site in lieu of the 7 canopy trees to be removed, which is considered to be a significant net gain which would benefit the subject site and the surrounds.

Page 36 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



SitingDesign Response

Ensure buildings are setback no less than the average distance of the front setback of the adjoining properties on either side or 9m, whichever is less.Ensure buildings are setback from at least one side boundary in accordance with the prevailing streetscape spacing.Ensure buildings in the Heritage Overlay are setback in line with or behind the adjoining heritage buildings in accordance with Council’s Heritage Policy.Ensure new development on a corner site is adequately set back to provide a transition between the adjoining buildings.Provide a secluded private open space with a minimum dimension of 4m to enable the planting and retention of large trees.

Officer Comment

Four properties in total make up Barenya Court, with two of those making up the subject site. Given the court layout, the standard ResCode front setback requirement for a typical street cannot be applied. As there are no existing dwellings on either abutting lots facing Barenya Court, the ResCode required setback is 4.0m. This is due to the fact that the property to the north of the subject site, the other side of the laneway, is the rear of the commercial property at No. 148-150 Cotham Road, which has a zero setback to the corner of Barenya Court. The other abutting property to the site is No. 1A Stirling Street, the rear of which presents to Barenya Court, setback approximately 7.5m from the Court

For the proposed development, the north, central and southern proposed ‘blocks’ that face Barenya Court respond to the curved shape of the cul-de-sac and have a minimum setback of 4.5m to the Court, which complies with the applicable ResCode standard. This approach provides a responsive and suitable transition of built form to the street and the setback of buildings at Nos. 1 and 3 Barenya Court, which make up the remainder of the Barenya Court. No. 1 Barenya Court has an angled setback from the Court, with a setback of approximately 5.0m-7.0m. No. 3 Barenya Court is setback approximately 5.5m from the Court.

Council’s Urban Designer remarked that…. “the design has also been refined to address the issue we raised regarding visual unity/consistency versus variety and

Page 37 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



richness in any new development. The proposed terrace form has now been complemented by a greater variation in façade alignment and materiality”.

In relation to side setbacks, the blocks are setback from their respective side boundaries, which in keeping with character of the street.

The private open space areas demonstrate that they can readily accommodate the planting of trees through the periphery of the site as well as centrally. The courtyards to each dwelling have dimensions varying from 3.0-4.0m, which is generally consistent with the guidelines of the Precinct Statement.

Building Height & FormDesign Response

Ensure new buildings are composed of facades that contain a single storey element with recessive upper levels.Ensure upper level additions to existing single storey dwellings are sufficiently setback to minimise their visibility.Ensure visible roof forms integrate with the pitched roofs in the streetscape.

Officer Comment

The cul-de-sac configuration of Barenya Court, as previously discussed, is somewhat of an ‘exclusive’ streetscape environment as a result of the limited number of properties it contains. The context is one that is influenced by the abuttal to the commercial precinct to the north and apartment developments to the west.

An objective of design guidelines within building height and form seeks…. “to ensure buildings do not dominate the streetscape or disrupt the existing streetscape rhythm”. It is evident, even with the limited amount of housing stock situated on the four lots of Barenya Court, that the immediate streetscape does not have a consistent rhythm or built form character due to the transition between the commercial buildings to the north,apartment developments to the west and the detached dwellings to the south and east.

In this context, the subject site is transitional between the commercial properties fronting Cotham Road (including four storey form), the three storey form fronting Glenferrie Road, and the double and single storey dwellings to the south and east. The proposal responds to the above guideline by way of relating its building height to the surrounding

Page 38 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



built form. Even in the case of the semi-detached Victorian dwelling to the south, despite the proposed development having a three storey profile though the central and southern blocks, the maximum RL of the proposed building (RL78.60) is lower than that of No. 9 Doona Avenue (RL79.57), as noted below.

Interface between No. 9 Doona Ave & the proposed Southern block.

It is considered that within the context of this residential / commercial environment, the part two, part three-storey scale of the built form provides a suitable transition between the more robust built form development to the north and west, to the more modest scales to the east and south.

In relation to the proposed roof form, the surrounding area contains a relatively balanced mix of pitched and flat roof form and therefore the flat roof parapet style design is acceptable. While the residential dwellings that interface with Barenya Court have a variety of pitched roof forms, the buildings in the abutting commercial precinct

Page 39 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



predominately have flat roofs. Given the strong presence of the commercial buildings, largely due to their height, and that the subject site adjoins this area, it is considered that the flat roof design of the proposed development is an appropriate design response.

Front Boundary Treatment Design Response

Ensure front fences are no more than 1.5m or the average fence height of the four properties on either side (whichever is less).Ensure the retention of original front fences where heritage overlays apply.Front fences along declared main roads (RD1Z) may be up to 2m in height where this is consistent with the prevailing fence height on the neighbouring properties.

Officer Comment

The design uses a 1.5m high visually permeable blade style front fence design which is considered to be appropriate.

Building Materials & Design DetailsDesign Response

Use building articulation, including contemporary materials that integrate with the streetscape character.Ensure the integration of front verandas and awnings into the façade design where this is a characteristic of the streetscape.Ensure materials, colours and façade articulation, including the size and spacing of windows, integrates with the streetscape.Ensure new dwellings and visible additions complement the historic buildings in the precinct.Ensure rooflines of new buildings, extensions and additions incorporate sloping roofs with greater than 10 degrees roof slope and reflect the existing character of surrounding dwellings.

Page 40 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Officer Comment

The site’s location abutting a commercial precinct to the north and a heritage precinct to the south results in the presence of a wide variety of building forms and materials in the immediate area. Contemporary built forms are clearly emerging within the commercial context of the Cotham Village Activity Centre, and the historical retention of dwellings clearly occurs to the south.

The proposal includes appropriate articulation with the use of varied built form setbacks, variations to the use of materials at the lower levels compared with the upper levels and the separation of the four individual ‘blocks’ throughout the site. The southern block also includes separation of at least 2.1m to further articulate and respond to the sensitivities of the southern interface.

The use of landscaping through the periphery and central areas of the site means that these separations of the form would be punctuated by greenery. This design characteristic would further assist with individualising the blocks and would generally reflect the fine grain pattern of the surrounds.

It is considered that the materials, colours and façade articulation, including the size and spacing of windows, would suitably integrate with the surrounding streetscape. This is due to the fact that the use of render, stone and charcoal and white colours clearly reflect the materials present in the surrounding area.

In relation to the southern / south-eastern interface, the design draws uponcharacteristics of the Victorian terrace (9 Doona Avenue) and the Art deco (No. 1A Stirling Street) through the use of comparable proportions to the massing of the façade,namely 9 Doona Avenue, as well as with the use of materials (render/masonry) and the colours pallet (white/muted greys), that contribute to a responsive, yet respectful, contemporary interpretation of the neighbouring heritage dwellings.

As previously discussed, the flat roof design directly draws upon the existing flat roof forms of the directly abutting built form to the north of the site. While the residential dwellings that interface with Barenya Court have a variety of pitched roof forms, the buildings in the abutting commercial precinct predominately have flat roofs. Given the strong presence of the commercial buildings, largely due to their height, and that the subject site directly abuts this area, it is considered that the flat roof design of the proposed development is an appropriate design response.

Page 41 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Car Parking StructuresDesign Response

Ensure car parking structures, including entrances to basements, are setback at least 1m behind the dwelling facade and are designed to minimise their prominence.Ensure basements project no more than 0.5m above natural ground level, unless the finished floor level of abutting properties is greater than 0.5m.Ensure basement garages are accessed from side or rear lane ways wherepossible.Ensure basement entrances are setback at least 5m from the primary street frontage and 1m behind the front wall of the building.

Officer Comment

Car parking will be provided within a single basement level, with access via a 6.5m wide crossover and vehicle ramp from Barenya Court.

This single crossover access to the site will replace three existing crossovers currently used to provide access to both No. 2 and 4 Barenya Court.

The basement entrance will be setback more than 5.0 metres from the street frontage and would be set well behind the building facade, in keeping with the design guidelines.

The basement level would sit entirely below natural ground level and therefore will have no prominence within the streetscape. The absence of vehicle access and associated hard-standing areas, a feature which currently dominates the subject site, will be a notable improvement on streetscape character.

Clause 55 (ResCode) & Residential Design Policy

Pursuant to Clause 55 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme, a development must meet all of the objectives of this clause and should meet all of the standards of this clause.

The amended Residential Design Policy (RDP) was adopted by Council on 12 December 2011. Given that the RDP is not included in the planning scheme, in practice, VCAT does not give the policy any statutory weight. The purpose of the policy is to assist planners in their discussions with applicants in achieving outcomes that are considered appropriate from a neighbourhood character or amenity point of view. It

Page 42 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



should be noted that each application needs to be assessed in respect to the particular characteristics of its locality and that provisions contained within the RDP should be used as a guide where relevant.

Overall, the proposal generally complies with the provisions of the zone and/or Schedule, Clause 55 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme, Clause 52.06 and Council's Residential Design Policy (refer to "Assessment Table") with the exception to the following:-

Clause 55.03 - Site Layout and Building Massing (VC100) Objective Standard Officer Comment B8Clause 55.03-3Site Coverage

To ensure that the site coverage respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and responds to the features of the site.

The site area covered by buildings should not exceed:

The maximum site coverage specified in a schedule to the zone, or If no maximum site coverage is specified in a schedule to the zone, 60 per cent.

See table below

RDP - Site Coverage Officer Comment The site area covered by all buildings should not exceed 50% of the site. See table below

Proposed Site Coverage

ResCode Requirements

Complies? RDP Requirement Complies?

54% 60% 50%

Officer Comment

Site coverage meets the ResCode standard, however marginally exceeds RDP Guidance. As noted previously in this report, the separation of the built form into four individual blocks allows landscaping through the central and periphery areas of the site that reduces massing impacts. It is considered that the site coverage of the development is a suitable response to the commercial interface to the north and the dwellings to the south and east.

Page 43 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Clause 55.03 - Site Layout and Building Massing (VC100) Objective Standard Officer Comment B9Clause 55.03-4Permeability Objectives

To reduce the impact of increased stormwater run-off on the drainage system. To facilitate on-site stormwater infiltration.

The site area covered by the pervious surfaces should be at least:

The minimum area specified in a schedule to the zone, or

If no minimum is specified in a schedule to the zone, 20 percent of the site.

See table below

RDP - Hard Surface Areas Officer Comment Hard paved areas (including building footprint, pathways, patios and driveways) should not exceed 65% of the site area.

See table below

Proposed Hard Surface Coverage

ResCode Requirements

Complies? RDP Requirement Complies?

76% 80% 65%

Officer Comment

There are no documented drainage issues with the area and the design includes water sensitive design elements which will capture and use on-site run-off, predominantly for the extensive landscaped areas.

Page 44 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Clause 55.04 - Amenity Impacts (VC100) Objective Standard Officer Comment B17Clause 55.04-1Side and Rear Setbacks

To ensure that the height and setback of a building from a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings.

A new building not on or within 200mm of a boundary should be set back from side or rearboundaries:

At least the distance specified in a schedule to the zone, or

If no distance is specified in a schedule to the zone

1 metre, plus 0.3 metres for every metre of height over 3.6 metres up to 6.9 metres,

1m + [0.3m x (wall height – 3.6)] = setback

plus 1 metre for every metre of height over 6.9 metres.

1.99 + 1m x (h – 6.9)] = setback

See table below

RDP - Side and Rear Setbacks Officer Comment The Backyard Setbacks are to be applied where a proposed development is adjacent to neighbouring secluded private open space (as defined in the Private Open Space section of this Policy). The Backyard Setbacks are:

2.0m from the boundary (when not within 0.15m of a boundary) up to a height of 3.6m. 2.0m from the boundary at 3.6m plus 0.6m for every metre of height over 3.6m.

Note: The “ResCode” setback requirements in Clause 55 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme will apply where they provide for a greater setback than required under this policy.

See table below

Page 45 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Side & Rear Boundary Setbacks N1, N2, E1 - Ground Floor

Proposed Wall Height (to

NGL)

Proposed Setback

ResCode Requirement

Complies? RDP Requirement

Complies?

North 3.4m 2.05m, 3.0m 1.0m - - West 1.0m 3.5m 1.0m - - Side & Rear Boundary Setbacks N1, N2, E1 - First Floor


NGL)

Proposed Setback

ResCode Requirement


Complies?

North 6.2m 2.05m 1.78m - - West 4.2m 3.2m 1.18m - - Side & Rear Boundary Setbacks N1, N2, E01 - Second Floor


NGL)

Proposed Setback

ResCode Requirement


Complies?

North 9.3m 4.0m 4.39m - - West 7.53m 5.1m 2.62m - -

Side & Rear Boundary Setbacks W1, W2, W3, W4, W5, W6 - Ground Floor


NGL)

Proposed Setback

ResCode Requirement


Complies?

North 2.39m 2.06m 1.0m - - West 2.57m 2m (min.) 1.0m 2.0m South 2.73m 3.0m 1.0m 2.0m Side & Rear Boundary Setbacks W1, W2, W3, W4, W5, W6 - First Floor


NGL)

Proposed Setback

ResCode Requirement


Complies?

North 6.63m 2.06m 1.9m - - West 6.77m (parapet

LV03) 2.68m (min.) 1.93m 3.86

South 5.8m 2.0m (min) 1.66m 3.32 Side & Rear Boundary Setbacks W1, W2, W3, W4, W5, W6 - Second Floor


NGL)

Proposed Setback

ResCode Requirement


Complies?

West 8.7m 4.4m 3.79m 5.06m

Page 46 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Side & Rear Boundary Setbacks S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6 - Ground Floor


NGL)

Proposed Setback

ResCode Requirement


Complies?

West 2.73m 2.0m 1.0m 2.0m South 2.95m 3.0m 1.0m 2.0m East 3.49m 2.0m 1.0m - - Side & Rear Boundary Setbacks S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6 - First Floor


NGL)

Proposed Setback

ResCode Requirement


Complies?

West 6.63m 2.0m 1.9m 3.8m South 6.4m, 6.0m,

6.42m 3.0m, 4.0m,

2.85m 1.84m, 1.72m,

1.84m , , 3.68m, 3.4m,

3.68m , ,

East 6.6m 2.0m 1.9m - - Side & Rear Boundary Setbacks S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6 - Second Floor


NGL)

Proposed Setback

ResCode Requirement


Complies?

South 9.15m 5.76m 4.19m 5.33m

Officer Comment

The proposed development registers a single ResCode non-compliance regarding the first floor northern wall of the northern ‘block’, which according to its 9.3m height, requires an additional 390mm setback in addition to the current 4.0m setback to this interface. This is a non-sensitive interface due to the laneway and the commercial properties to the north. As such, the minor variation can be supported on the basis that the height and setback of the building from the boundary would respect the existing neighbourhood character and would not impact on the amenity of existing dwellings.

In relation to the RDP, the first and second floor setback of Dwellings W1 through W6 from the western boundary (abutting the rear of 912 Glenferrie Road) do not meet the RDP requirement. The first floor is considered to be sufficiently articulated through varied setbacks and materials that mitigate the built form impact. The impact of the second floor is limited given that only 2 dwellings are proposed at that level, with a length of approximately 10m.

The setback of the first floor of Dwellings W1 through W6 to the south also does not meet the RDP requirement. This setback faces the side wall of No. 5/190 Glenferrie

Page 47 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Road. While there are windows to this elevation of the adjoining property, the windows are protected by the north-facing window provision of ResCode, of which the proposed development complies. It is therefore considered that amenity impacts are reasonable.

The setback of Dwellings S1 through S6 do not meet the RDP setback requirements from the south at the first floor level, which abuts the SPOS of 9 Doona Avenue. It is considered that impact of the development on this interface is mitigated by the large area of SPOS of the abutting property, which has a width of approximately 15m and depth of 27m. It is also noted that the private open space of No. 9 Doona Avenue is orientated in an east-west direction and therefore does not directly face the subject site to the north (side) boundary of this space. Furthermore, the southern elevation of these dwellings provides clear breaks in the built form and varied setbacks to further mitigate the impact of this built form.

Clause 55.04 - Amenity Impacts (VC37) Objective Standard Officer Comment B21Clause 55.04-5Overshadowing Open Space

To ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space.

Where sunlight to the secluded private open space of an existing dwelling is reduced, at least 75 per cent, or 40 square metres with minimum dimension of 3 metres, whichever is the lesser area, of the secluded private open space should receive a minimum of five hours of sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm on 22 September.

If existing sunlight to the secluded private open space of an existing dwelling is less than the requirements of this standard, the amount of sunlight should not be further reduced.

Non-compliance

Officer Comment

The plan of survey submitted with the application noted the private open space of 5/910 Glenferrie Road calculated as a total of 103m². Post-advertising and the objections received, the applicant revisited the site to investigate the size and existing/proposedshadow.

The two components of the open space (north and east) are secluded private open space (SPOS) areas, with both being useable, private and accessible from a living area. The applicant has revisited the calculations previously shown on the plans and confirms that the correct SPOS area for No. 5/910 Glenferrie Road is approximately 72m², comprising both areas.

Page 48 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



These two elements of SPOS are partially shadowed by the existing 2.0m high fence and an existing garage wall along their eastern boundary (located on the subject site, which will be demolished as part of this development).

Due to the discrepancy in the SPOS total area calculations, the applicant hasreassessed the shadow impacts and confirms that the shadow incurred would be contrary to Standard B21 of ResCode. This is also due, in part, to the existing wall on the common boundary, which causes existing shadow to the adjoining SPOS. It isnoted that the existing shadow conditions from the subject site (beyond that caused by the common boundary fence) to this SPOS are as follows:

- 9:00am: 6.0m²- 10:00am: 3.7m²- 11:am: 1.8m²

In order to limit the additional shadowing to these SPOS areas, the applicant has submitted plans after advertising which show a lowering of the height of the proposed dwelling W-06 (proposed to the north of No. 5/910 Glenferrie Road) to a maximum height of 5.5m (5.2m at the front) above natural ground level. This would result in additional shadow to this SPOS, beyond the existing fence shadow, as follows:

- 9:00am: 6.17m² (17cm² greater shadow than existing conditions)- 10:00am: 2.2m² (1.5m² less shadow than existing conditions)- 11:00am: 1.5m² (30cm² less shadow than existing conditions)

As such, based on the additional plan submitted, it will be only at 9am where an additional 17cm² of shadow would incur. At 10am and 11am, there will be less shadow incurred than the existing conditions. The SPOS of No. 5/910 Glenferrie Road wouldthen be untouched by shadow from the proposed development throughout the remainder of the day. This therefore means that 5 hours of sunlight to 40m² of the adjoining SPOS will be available throughout the day. As such, this would be compliant with Standard B21 of ReCode and result in less shadow than the existing conditions on the site. The additional information submitted has been assessed and confirmed to be accurate.

A recommended condition of permit requires the additional plan cited above, with the lowering of the height of Dwelling W-06, (TP-504 dated 5/3/2017) to be submitted for endorsement.

Page 49 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Clause 55.05 - On-Site Amenity and Facilities (VC100) Objective Standard Officer Comment B28Clause 55.05-4Private Open Space

To provide adequate private open space for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents.

A dwelling or residential building should have private open space of an area and dimensions specified in a schedule to the zone.

If no area or dimensions are specified in a schedule to the zone, a dwelling or residentialbuilding should have private open space consisting of:

An area of 40 square metres, with one part of the private open space to consist of secluded private open space at the side or rear of the dwelling or residential building with a minimum area of 25 square metres, a minimum dimension of 3 metres and convenient access from a living room, orA balcony of 8 square metres with a minimum width of 1.6 metres and convenient access from a living room, orA roof-top area of 10 square metres with a minimum width of 2 metres and convenientaccess from a living room.

See next page

RDP - Private Open Space Officer Comment Dwellings should provide a minimum private open space area as follows:

Vegetation Significance Ranking from RUCS Min. Private Open Space for Dwellings

Secluded POS

0-2* 50m2

3-4 60m2

See table below

RUCS Vegetation Ranking =

Dwellings should have a minimum secluded private open space dimension of 5 metres. Non-compliance At least one canopy tree is required to be planted in the open space of each proposed dwelling. Refer to landscape plan

for details

Page 50 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Private Open Space Proposed

Secluded POS Proposed Total POS

ResCode Requirement

(Secluded/Total POS)

Complies? RDP Requirement (Secluded POS)

Complies?

E1 42m2 67m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 E2 42m2 42m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 E3 40m2 40m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 N1 34m2 68m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 N2 39m2 49m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 W1 38m2 77m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 W2 40m2 50m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 W3 45m2 55m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 W4 46m2 56m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 W5 39m2 49m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 W6 42m2 76m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 A1 27m2 27m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 A2 44m2 44m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 A3 38m2 38m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 A4 27m2 27m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 S1 25m2 81m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 S2 25m2 41m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 S3 32m2 42m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 S4 32m2 45m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 S5 25m2 44m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 S6 25m2 84m2 25m2 40m2 50m2 B1 8m2 8m2 8m2 B2 8m2 8m2 8m2 B3 20m2 20m2 8m2 B4 16m2 16m2 8m2

Officer Comment

The design typology is generally akin to an apartment development, with large pedestrian external corridors linking the terrace townhouses. Importantly, all dwellings have the requisite area SPOS (either 25sqm courtyard or 8sqm balcony) required under Standard B28, and all areas meet the minimum dimensions of 3m for ground level open space or 1.6m for the balconies (where the balcony is the only SPOS provided). Three dwellings have an overall area of POS below the total 40sqm, which is not considered to be a significant shortcoming considering the large internal communal landscaped areas fronting these dwellings. It is noted that two of these dwellings have direct access onto the communal open space.

In relation to the RDP non-compliance, the development is supplemented by the large central ‘landscape zone’, which exceeds more than 300sqm of green space within the

Page 51 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



site confines. It is considered that this would provide a high level of amenity for future residents.

OBJECTION RESPONSE

Those matters not already addressed in the foregoing report are discussed below:-

Total Number of Objections Received: 86

Summary of Objection Officer CommentOverdevelopment of the site A detailed assessment of the proposal

against the neighbourhood character considerations of ResCode including bulk, mass, scale and height is provided above. Overall, it is considered that the proposed development responds appropriately to the site context and is not an overdevelopment of the site.

Overlooking to the west of the site The plans show that habitable windows and balconies with an outlook to the west have been screened in accordance with Standard B22 of ResCode. Specifically, Level 1 west-facing habitable room windows of Dwellings W-03 and W-04 are shown with 75% frosted glazing to a height of 1.8m above the finished floor level. The balconies facing west on this level have fixed louvre screens fixed at a 45 degree angle to avoid direct views into the adjoining property, in accordance with Standard B22.

Loss of established trees Council’s Arborist has reviewed the existing vegetation to be removed and has advised that this is acceptable. A detailed Landscape Plan has been submitted with the application and is considered to provide a comprehensive landscape scheme which will integrate the development with the surrounding area.

Overshadowing of private open spaces to the west

As detailed in the assessment section of this report, further information submitted

Page 52 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



by the applicant post-advertising confirms that the proposal will comply with the ResCode overshadowing provision (subject to condition). Dwelling W-06 (adjacent the southern boundary) will be lowered in height and correction of the calculation of the adjoining SPOS areas has been undertaken, to ensure that the proposal will fully comply with the applicable ResCode standard.

Adverse impacts on neighbourhood character

As discussed in the body of this report, it is considered that the proposed development responds appropriately to the existing and preferred neighbourhood character.

Lack of visitor car parking The proposal fully complies with both the resident and visitor car parking requirements of the Scheme and no reduction in parking is being sought.

Increased traffic and lack of parking The proposed development satisfies Clause 52.06 of the Scheme in respect to the provision of car parking. The development provides for appropriate on-site car parking relative to the number of bedrooms in the proposed dwellings.

Council’s Traffic and Transport Department has assessed the application and has raised no concerns regarding the impact of the proposal on the surrounding traffic network. The increased traffic movement associated with the proposal onthe site can be readily accommodated in the surrounding street network.

Demolition of existing building (No. 4 Barenya Court), which has heritage value

Council’s Strategic Planning Department has sought advice from its heritage consultant on the potential heritage significance of No. 4 Barenya Court and has advised that the existing building is not of individual heritage significance. As such, it will not be pursing heritage controls on this site.

Page 53 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



Impacts during construction A Construction Management Plan to the satisfaction of Council is recommended as a condition of permit and will manage impacts of the proposed development on the surrounding area during the construction phase. Such a plan would limit the hours of construction activity, manage traffic and parking associated with tradespersons, as well as control amenity impacts such as noise, dust, water runoff and the like.

Impact on existing infrastructure The capacity of services in the area is a matter for the relevant servicing authorities. The applicant will be required to ensure appropriate connections at the subdivision stage.

Inappropriate three storey height As discussed in the body of this report, it is considered that the proposed development is appropriate to its context. The three storey elements of the proposed development are cited in a way that will not dominate Barenya Court or the surrounding area. They have appropriate setbacks and are sufficiently recessed in form so as to not dominate the surrounding area.

Visual bulk to surrounding properties The proposed development provides appropriate setbacks and citing to ensure that it does present unreasonable visual bulk to surrounding properties. The proposed development complies with all ResCode height and setback requirements (save for one setback adjacent the laneway) and is well articulated to ensurethat it will integrate with and not dominate the surrounding properties.

Page 54 of 54

______________________________________________________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________U

rban Planning S

pecial Com

mittee A

genda05/06/17

City of B

oroondara2 &

4 Barenya C

ourt Kew

of 88

______________________________________________________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________U

rban Planning S

pecial Com

mittee A

genda05/06/17

City of B

oroondara2 &

4 Barenya C

ourt Kew

of 88

______________________________________________________________________________________



upc2 2 & 4 barenya court kew - city of boroondara...demolition of existing buildings (page 28);...

Documents