Some of our services are impacted due to COVID-19.

Video URL
Fri 8 May 2020
Audio description

Well welcome everybody to tonight's very first virtual meeting of the urban planning special committee meeting. My name is Councillor Gary Thompson and I chair this committee. The health and safety and the wellbeing of the community has and always will be paramount to consideration of the council. 
Council continues to be guided by the government's directives and wants to be able to do the right thing for the health of our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. The COVID-19 omnibus, the emergency measures act 2020, passed by the Victorian Parliament on the 23rd of April 2020 included changes to the Local Government Act 2020, which affected the conduct of council meetings. The changes became effective from the 1 May 2020. 
Council is now able to hold virtual meetings and councillors can participate in meetings remotely by electronic means of communication. This is necessitated changes to the existing operation of the urban planning special committee meeting. Unfortunately we will not be able to participate facilitate members of our community or applicants addressing councillors at tonight's meeting. Please be assured councillors have been informed with your written submissions and will consider it in their assessment of the planning application. Councillors have also had the opportunity to visit the planning application sites. 
The urban planning special committee is being live streamed on the Council's website this evening, so you will be able to view the proceedings of the meeting, council deliberations and voting. The meeting is also being recorded and will be made available on the council's website as soon as practically possible after the meeting. We are conducting our first virtual meeting this evening so please excuse us as we advance we should be experiencing any teething problems. 
Should technical problems be encountered by the committee and we will be adjourned until a resolution or postponed. I'm going to start by introducing my fellow councillors and officers present this evening for the urban planning special committee meeting, and councillors as I ask your name I declare that you say that you are present when I call your name. Councillor Jack Wegman, present. Councillor Felicity Sinfield, present. Councillor Jane Addis, thank you chair. Councillor Lisa Hollingsworth. Councillor Jim Parke, good evening chair I'm present. Councillor Steve Hurd, yes. Councillor Phillip Healey, present. Councillor Coral Ross, present. The Mayor Councillor Cynthia Watson, present chair.  and Councillor Hollingsworth are we able to hear your voice, it appears not. We do acknowledge that Councillor Hollingsworth is with us this evening. 
We also have with us the chief executive officer Mr Phillip Storer, Director of City Planning Shiran Wickramasinghe, Manager of Statutory Planning Mr Simon Mitchell, Manager of Governance Mr David Thompson, Governance Projects Officer Elizabeth Manou. There will also be a number of other officers who will be in attendance this evening and they will be introduced as they present their reports.  
The purpose of the urban planning special committee essentially is to deal with issues under the planning and environment and the building act. The committee has delegated authority to make decisions on behalf of council. Councillors are familiar with the reports which include summaries of the objections received. I will now move on to the order of business as listed in our business papers. Apologies. Mr Thompson have we received any apologies for this meeting? Through you Mr chair there are no apologies for this evening. Thank you Mr Thompson. 
Move on to item 1, adoption and confirmation of the minutes of the upsc meeting held on the 23rd of March 2020. Councillors can I seek a motion to adopt and confirm the minutes. Councillor Watson. I move to adopt the minutes. Thank you and do I have a seconder, yes Councillor Healey. Are there any opposed, it appears to be none. I will now ask each councillor individually if you're in favour of the motion. Councillor Ross are you in favour of the motion? That's a yes councillor Ross. Yes. Councillor Parke you're in favour of the motion. Yes. Councillor Sinfield are you in favour of the motion? Yes I am chair. Councillor Healey are you in favour of the motion. Yes mr chair. Councillor Wegman are you in favour of the motion, yes. Councillor Watson are you in favour of the motion, yes chair I support the motion. Councillor Addis are you in favour of the motion, in favour thanks chair. Councillor Hurd are you in favour of the motion. Councillor Hollingsworth are you in favour of the motion, yes chair. I don't believe I got acknowledgement from councillor Hurd, councillor Hurd are you in favour of the motion? Yeah I did say it before I don't know what's happened there might be a bit of a delay. Thank you, thank you councillor Hurd. I declare that motion carried unanimously thank you councillors.
Move on to item two a declaration of any conflict of interest of any councillor or councillor officer this evening. Councillors and officers are there any conflicts of interest that need to be declared? Councillor Sinfield. Yes chair I have a conflict of interest in relation to agenda item 3.2 which I’m happy to declare at that time under section 78 of the local government act. Thank you councillor Sinfield are there any other councillors, there appears to be none.
We'll move on to item 3.1.  Item 3.1 unit 4, 9 Marlowe Street, Canterbury this report will be introduced  by Cassandra Rae coordinator of statutory planning. Thank you mr chair. Upc number one relates to a property at unit four number nine Marlowe Street in Canterbury. The application is for the construction of an extension to an existing dwelling on a lot less than 500 square metres. The extension will create a first floor addition to accommodate two bedrooms a rumpus room  a bathroom and a storeroom. The site is located within the neighbourhood  residential zone 3 and is not affected by any overlay controls. The site is currently developed with a single story  unit that was constructed mid 1970. It has two bedrooms and a single lock-up garage. Notice that the original set of plans attracted 13 objections to the application. Since notice, revised plans have been received and they're attached to the agenda tonight.  
The application was formally amended to increase the southern boundary by one metre. Revised shadow diagrams have also been submitted with the application that demonstrates that the proposal meets the relevant res code from vision in relation to shadow. Overall the proposal is considered to align with our preferred neighbourhood character statements including pitch roof double story scale and will not detrimentally affect the streetscape. In relation to rescode the application achieves a high level of compliance with the relevant res code standards with the exception of site coverage in which this is not varied from the existing condition at 68 per cent and standard a10 which is side and rear set backs in which the first floor edition has a non-compliance in relation to the western setback where it interfaces with the neighbours' garage and common driveway and therefore will not impact on any sensitive area. In relation to overlooking conditions will be imposed to ensure compliance with the standard. As such it is considered that the proposal significantly meets the relevant planning policy. It is recommended that a notice of decision to grant a planning permit be issued subject to conditions. 
Thank you ms Rae for your presentation. Councillors there are no public gallery presentations this evening so I will now turn into questions of the officers. Are there any questions of the officers this evening? There appears to be no questions of officers, I'm now in search of a motion can I, Councillor Addis. Thank you very much chair there's an alternative motion that's been circulated and I wonder if that could be put up on the screen. Councillor Addis this is the notice of refusal to grant permit pp 190707 is this your alternative motion? It is thank you chair. Thank you, to assist councillor Addis is there a seconder to the motion, councillor Ross happy to second. Thank you councillor Ross. To assist Councillor Addis are there any councillors in opposition this evening you can raise your hands, Councillor Parke, thank you councillors and councillor Wegman. Thank you we'll now turn to the mover's response councillor Addis do you like to move thank you chair. For me this is a really tough one to judge because when I look at it and read the officer's report I think if I were an officer then I would be um suggesting that this application be approved because technically what's being proposed here is compliant but I’m not an officer and I guess that gives me the option to look at other things that aren't just the technical things and what I see here is one of four that was built in a way that didn't really contemplate this sort of extension, it was built in another era when it seemed that you know two-bedroom houses um were very much more accepted and that's what it was built for it's for one of four on a block and it sits well within the block as a very modest house but what they're seeking to do here is to turn a very modest house into a three-bedroom plus study plus rumpus room family home. 
And yet it doesn't provide the sorts of things that a modern development of that scale would provide these days. It doesn't provide adequate parking what we see here is just one car park and essentially this application largely relies on the amenity of the surrounding properties it only works because there is plenty of open space around it and what I can see is that this is one of four and while technically yes this is compliant I think what would happen if we ended up with four houses on the block that were equivalent to this and what we could end up with is 12 to 16 bedrooms if we count the study as a potential bedroom and then we could end up with eight or more cars very easily whereas each unit only really has one car space so it's for those sorts of reasons that  I don't feel I can support this application and thus the moving of this notice of refusal, thank you chair.  
Thank you councillor Addis, um councillor Watson as seconder do you wish to speak now or reserve your right? Cr Ross was seconder. Yes I'm seconding and yes I'll speak now. I'm well reminded that Cr Wegman often says that when one looks at planning there are objectives which must be met, but standards which should be met. Often what we do is look at the standards  and say if they meet the standards then that's fine. In this particular case it doesn't actually even meet all the standards but you will use the standards as a  guide to see whether or not the  objectives are met  but it doesn't actually follow in this particular case because if you go to the property you can clearly see how much of an overdevelopment that this is. As councillor Addis said that the current property sits very well within the block and what this would be would be doubling the number of bedrooms, but what it will be doing it will be borrowing the neighbour's amenity to make this a viable proposition if you like. So the objectives as far as the planning scheme are not met by this proposal and for that reason I will be opposing I would oppose the original application and will be supporting councillor Addis's refusal.  
Thank you councillor Ross for your response. Any other councillor seeking to speak this evening, uh councillor Hollingsworth I believe you were first followed by Councillor Hurd. Thank you mr chair can you hear me, yes we can. You've turned your camera the other direction please speak councillor Hollingsworth. Thank you thank you um I support councillor Addis' refusal I am also familiar with the site uh I agree that I believe this will be an over development. I sympathize with the residents particularly on the rear boundary and can understand why they would be concerned with the proposed application abutting the boundary but also the area is heavily developed and I believe that this would be another development to introduce the proposed building on this block.  
Thank you councillor Hollingsworth and councillor Hurd. Just want to confirm can I confirm that I'm being heard because of the latency. You are Councillor Hurd thank you. I'll be very brief I'll be supporting the refusal. I agree with councillors Hollingsworth, Addis and Ross that this is in this circumstance an overdevelopment and I think perhaps a dangerous precedent. 
Thank you councillor Hurd any other councillors wishing to speak on this item?  There appears to be no further councillors seeking to speak. I will now return to the mover of the motion councillor Addis to wrap up the debate. Just briefly to thank those who spoke um and also to thank the officers for what I think is a  technically accurate and well-written report and in moving a different motion I'm not in any  way seeking to imply that there's anything wrong with  this report I think it's a well-written  report  and as I said I'm in the lucky  position of  being able to judge things perhaps in  a slightly less technical way and   to think about the consequences for  the neighbourhood  thank you chair. 
Thank you councillor Addis I'll now put this motion to the vote and I'm going to in turn ask each councillor  whether they are in favour of councillor Addis' motion. Councillor Ross are you in favour? Yes. Councillor Parke are you in favour, no. Councillor Sinfield are you in favour, yes I support the alternate motion. Councillor Healey are you in favour, yes. Councillor Wegman are you in favour, no. councillor Watson are you in favour,  uh yes I support the alternative motion  chair.  Councillor Addis are you in favour,  um yes I am thanks chair. Councillor Hurd are you in favour,  uh yes chair I'm in favour of the  alternative motion.  Councillor Hollingsworth are you in favour,  yes mr chair. And I will declare that I too am in favour and I'll declare that motion carried, thank you councillors.
We'll move on to item 3.2 but before we do so we recognize that councillor Sinfield has a conflict of interest it's a little bit of magic to occur shortly. Councillor Sinfield before you depart can you declare your conflict.  Thank you chair I have a conflict under section 78 of the Local Government Act in relation to this item being agenda item three point two, eight five two to eight five eight Glenferrie Road in Hawthorn. I'll now excuse myself from the meeting thank you.  Thank you Councillor Sinfield, Councillor Sinfield is no longer a part of this item so we'll now return to item 3.2 852 to 858 Glenferrie Road Hawthorn, this will be introduced by Julia Smith senior statutory planner.  
Thank you and through you mr chair I present upc  item 3.2 associated with the land  at 852-858 Glenferrie Road in Hawthorn. The proposal seeks  permission to construct a seven-story  building  above basement car parking comprising of  a residential hotel  with 95 lodging rooms and a food and  drink premises  at the ground floor level. The proposal  also seeks permission to reduce the  standard car parking rate  and bicycle facility requirements  associated with the food and drink  premises,  and to construct a canopy in a road zone.  The application was advertised in December 2019 and 39 objections were  received. The key issues raised in the objections related to a lack of on-site parking   increased  traffic generation in the laneway and  amenity impacts to residential  properties. All matters raised by objectors have  been addressed in the delegates report. With regards to the proposed reduction  in car parking  conditions are recommended to be  included on the planning permit  which will require the development to  fully comply  with clause 5206 in relation to both  the residential hotel and the food and  drink premises.  
Council's traffic engineers have reviewed the proposal and are satisfied the volume of traffic  generated by the development  will not exceed the capacity of the  laneway or the wider local network.  And subject to the recommended permit  conditions the safe  operation of the laneway will be ensured. It is important to note  that it is proposed to widen the laneway  to match the setbacks of the adjoining  building to the north  which will assist with improving traffic  movement and flow  within the laneway. In respect to the  site's  interface with residential properties to  the east of the rear laneway  the proposed development achieves full  compliance with res code  in terms of its rear setbacks  overlooking and overshadowing.  The proposed development is half a metre  lower in height  and one story in overall height and one  story lower in street wall height than  the adjoining  mixed use building located to the north. Providing an appropriate transition to  the buildings located to the south of  the site. The proposed upper level setbacks vary  from   1.7 meters to 5 meters, forming a rate profile  and this will assist in screening the  southern black wall  of the adjoining property which would  otherwise be exposed.  It is recommended that council issue a  notice of decision to grant  a planning permit subject to the  conditions detailed in the report  thank you mr chair.  
Thank you miss smith for your presentation councillors again there are  no  community presentations this evening so I'll  turn your minds to  questions of the officers. Are there any  questions of the officers. Councillor Hurd. Thank you chair  um i have one question and I'm prepared  to  foreshadow a motion as printed  from the officer's recommendations.  Thank you um my question is um  just to clarify the current building I believe I'm told there are Telstra towers or some sort of apparatus above the  property  um is it proposed on the new property  that  though if that's true are those  facilities going to be reinstalled upon  the new  um property.  Thank you councillor Hurd um can I seek  a response to that from officers.  
Through you mr chair the applicant that is  correct  there are telecommunications  infrastructure  on the existing building. The applicant  has advised  that they are not intending to reinstate  the existing telecommunications infrastructure  above the proposed residential hotel  and there's no requirement for them  for them to do so.  Thank you in that case, thank you Councillor Hurd  does that answer your question? It chair does sorry I wasn't sure when I  should  speak or not um and I'm happy to  foreshadow that motion when  required. Thank you I’ll just ask if any  other councillors have any questions of  the officers,  there appears to be no further questions  with uh moving to that time councillor Hurd you foreshadowed a motion. Thank you chair yes I'd like to move the  officer's report  be accepted uh as printed and that we  give you grant permission. and  I have a signal from councillor Parke you  seconding councillor Hurd's motion  that's an acknowledgement  to assist councillor Hurd are there any councillors in opposition? Councillor Hurd there appears to be  none so I'll move to you as the mover of the motion. 
Thank you chair um thank you very much  I'd like to first say that I completely understand the   nature of the objections living in  the area myself I understand what those  objections are  however I think it would be also true to  say that this development does not  really  add effect in in a way it decreases  some of the traffic that that is going  to be around that area because of the  fact that a they're like  lane b they're producing they're being  asked to comply  with the clause 506 and they're also  building a building which in actuality  will be slightly shorter I believe than  the current  building which is on the on the site so  um I guess it's always hard around the Glenferrie road area in relation to traffic in relation to that but i don't  feel that this  development will in any way add to it it  won't reduce  either very much but it won't add to the traffic congestion. I’ve read  the objections very thoroughly the nature of this hearing and that we can't hear from objectors and I would say that this is a safe construction and won't really add to the massive traffic too much.  
Thank you councillor Hurd um councillor Parke as seconder do you wish to speak  now or reserve your right. Only to add that I endorse the  comments by councillor Hurd.  Thank you councillor Parke are there any  other councillors seeking to speak  on this item this evening. Councillor Hollingsworth. I also wanted to support the comments  from Councillor Hurd and Councillor Parke um I believe there is a  desperate need for a residential hotel  in the hawthorn precinct and I'm also  mindful that  it's unlikely the facility is at all  times going to be at full capacity  uh so I believe with the officers  conditions and  recommendations that the application  uh has a lot of merit in it I think  architecturally  it's a very well designed facility and  I'm in full support of it thank you.
Thank you councillor Hollingsworth no other  councillors  appear to be seeking to speak on this  item so I'll now return to the mover  councillor Hurd to  round out your reply. Thank you chair  just thank you to the officers for their  diligent work and to the developers and  the objectors  always a difficult process so thank you  all. Thank you councillor Hurd. I will now put this motion to the vote  and I'll call out each councillor's name,  councillor Ross are you in favour of the motion, in favour. Thank you.  Councillor Sinfield are you in favour of the motion, sorry Councillor Watson are you in favour of the motion, yes I am thank you chair. Thank you. Councillor Wegman  are you in favour of the motion, yes.  Thank you. Councillor Parke are you in  favour of the motion, yes chair. Councillor Addis are you in  favour of the motion,  in favour chair. Councillor Hollingsworth are you in favour  of the motion,  yes chair. Councillor Healey are you in  favour of the motion,  yes chair. Councillor Hurd are you in favour of the motion, yes chair. And as chair I also declare  that I'm in favour of the motion and I declare  that motion carried unanimously thank  you councillors.  We'll just now wait for councillor  Sinfield to  return item for item 3.3. 
Welcome back councillor Sinfield, I believe your camera is off at the  moment. We will now return to item 3.3, 2 Denham Street and 2 Wood Street Hawthorn. This  report will be introduced by Stephanie Ng senior statutory planner. Thank you through you mr chair item 3.3 before  you tonight seeks for partial demolition  including outbuildings and fencing and  buildings and racks associated with an  existing church in a heritage overlay , use of the land for a childcare centre with 118 children,  construction of buildings and works  associated with a section two use  being the child care centre in a  neighbourhood residential zone scheduled  three  over two lots display of a business  identification signage  and reduction in car parking  requirements. 
The site forms for part of two Denham Street and two Wood Street Hawthorn.  The subject site is currently developed  with five main buildings  including the church a memorial hall  the wood hall a cottage and the vicarage.  The proposed childcare centre building  itself will not be cited immediately  adjacent to any residential properties  with the closest residential drawings  aside from the cottage and vicarage will be located north approximately 17  meters  from the proposed child care centre. As a  result  it is considered that the proposed  location and siting in itself  will minimize adverse amenity impacts on  the surrounding residential properties.  Council's heritage advisor has assessed  the proposal and is supportive of its  relationship with the heritage buildings  on site. Council's arborist is also supportive of  the proposal  subject to recommended conditions which will provide  appropriate landscape opportunities  throughout the site.  
The proposed development and use is consistent with the policy statements of  council's  discretionary uses in residential areas  policy. Subject to permit conditions the  proposal meets  all performance standards. In relation to  the proposed reduction of free  car parking spaces officers and council's  traffic engineers are of the view that  the parking reduction is satisfactory  because of the survey conducted which  shows that at a time of peak  parking demand there were 15 car spaces  available in wood street  which is a non-residential street and  therefore can accommodate the three car  parking spaces needed  if the child care centre was operating  at full capacity.  Council's traffic engineers are  satisfied with the proposed car parking  and considers the potential traffic  generation will not have a significant  adverse impact on the traffic conditions  in the surrounding network.  In response to concerns raised by  objectives with regards to the  existing cottage and recreation on site  conditions 20 and 23 of the officer's  recommendation  addresses any future amenity concerns.  Details of the proposal  further discussions of all objections  and assessment against relevant controls  and policies  are contained in the attachment to this  report and I welcome any questions  thank you mr chair. 
Thank you miss Ng for your presentation. If there are no questions I will now ask councillors if they've  got any  questions of officers, Councillor Hurd I  believe you were first councillor Hollingsworth second. Councillor Hurd. Yes thank you chair um no questions but  ready to move um the motion. Thank you councillor Hurd councillor Hollingsworth  any questions for the officers. thank you  mr chair  uh just for the officer um  with regard to the  car park deficiency or request for  concession for  reduction in three car parks the concern I have is that it is connecting to a  school it's a very busy area  uh I can appreciate with child care um  there will be varied  hours of when  parents  or carers do pick up children from child  care  but the concern I have is the drop-off  time uh is likely to correlate with the actual school drop off. 
And so  the concern is that  with the car park being limited and  obviously competing  uh needs of parents and carers dropping  off children at school but also  parents then going to childcare that  with the car park reduction I ask the question of what would be  required to  perhaps give consideration to  less number of children at child care to  create one  additional car space.  So your question of the officers are  councillor Hollingsworth about the reductions. The question is yes yes um I believe the officer's recommendation  is  to allow 118 children  be registered at the daycare centre a  maximum of 118  at any one time um to  enable it to be compliant with the  reduction of um  one car park what would need to be  the reduction of children.  Thank you councillor Hollingsworth I'll pass  that to the officers for a  response. 
Through you mr chair so for dispensation to be reduced to two  car spaces we will need to limit the child places to 113 children  and for dispensation to be reduced  to one car space we will need to limit  to 109 children and for no dispensation it will be a limit  of 104 children.  Right thank you thank you for that um  can I reserve the right to comment later.  We're in questions we will be moving  through no other questions of officers  councillor Hollingsworth we'll be moving into the next part of the  motion. Thank you. Any other questions councillors, councillor Ross I believe you were next. Thank you mr chair um through you if I can ask  regarding the hours of the um child care centre the recommendation has it that they  should be 6.30 in the morning until 7.30 at night. Is 7.30 at night  the normal  hours for child care centres to operate  until. 
Through you mr chair yes so 6.30am to 7.30pm hours of operation is in accordance with the performance  criteria under clause 22.02 which is the  discretionary users policy  so we have um proposed commissions  to be in accordance with this policy.  Thank you mr chair.  Thank you councillor Ross does that answer  your question.  Thank you. Councillor Sinfield I think  you foreshadowed a question as well.  Thank you chair and through you to  officers I’m wondering if  uh I might be able to find out when the  parking study was done  so that both councillors and the  community can  be assured that the study was not done  during the time of  impact on our community of covid19. Ms ng. 
Yes through you mr chair so the car parking survey was done on  Monday 12th of November 2018.  Thank you mr chair. Thank you Councillor Sinfield. Any other councillors seeking to  ask questions of the officers this  evening. Councillor Parke. Did I hear 2018 and if that's correct that's 18 months  old I  guess that that raises a different question um  if it was 18   why is it 18 months old the report. Through you mr chair yes the parking  traffic survey  was done from my understanding the  applicant has been  engaging with council with this  application for over 14 months  so it was a lot of um so yes this traffic report was prepared  in 2018  at the end of 2018. Thank you mr chair. Thank you miss Ng. Councillor Parke does that answer your question. Well it does although I guess uh my  observation on that is it's  perhaps sub-optimal um but  it is what it is I guess. Councillor Ross I’m not sure if you  gestured to  ask another question, no thank you. That appears to conclude questions from  councillors to officers. Councillor  Hurd you did foreshadow a motion,  yes I did chair and thank you for coming  back to me.  
I would like to move the officers' report as printed,  have concerns but we'll explain that in  the discussion.  And thank you Councillor Hurd I'm in search  of a seconder councillor  Healey are you happy to second yes for the  purposes of debate.  Thank you councillor Healey. To assist councillor Hurd is there any  opposition to this item,  it appears to be four  councillors potentially in opposition Councillor Hurd. As the mover I’ll hand to  you to speak to your motion. Given the fact that I can't see the  video who the councillors were that  indicated opposition to the motion  not not for any nasty sort of nefarious  reasons just a matter of um  addressing their concerns. Thank you  um can I just ask those councillors  who've raised their hands  it is councillor Sinfield, Watson, Addis and Hollingsworth. 
Okay um well thanks very much and I completely understand  um why there might be concern about this  one because I shared the concern I might add I've  known about the  development of this for some time this  started I first heard about it in around about  2013 so I know the proposal to have a child  care centre in this particular area  has been going for some time. I've spoken  briefly to the opponent I've also looked in very detail um at many of the or all of the objections  and would observe that many of these  objections  are directed at matters  which relate to the use of the property  by the owner of the property which I believe is the Anglican church in the  Melbourne diocese. So for example the school say that  there'd be lack of use of the tennis  court etc  but that in fact is the church's  property anyway and  um and there's many others like that  where  people have seen their use for the  property for a while  and now that's changing. 
Secondly  look it's difficult with the car parking  but I do note that it starts at 6.30am childcare in the morning until   obviously drop off times around school  times will be some parents who are  taking their children to school and will  have the convenience of having maybe a  younger child  at the child care centre and or dropping  children off earlier if they need to be  at work  in earlier hours or later hours for that  matter. so I don't know that the drop-off issue  is going to be as  pronounced as perhaps people might  think it would be.  I would also add that this area if  you're going to build a child care  centre this is probably the place to do  it   the building is very uh  sensitive to heritage uh  the heritage environment  the bowls  club is nearby  the primary school is nearby and of  course the Anglican church. one thing about the parking is of course  that when the child care centre isn't in  use on the weekends it will provide the  local residents with the amenity of  extra car parking  at their church which means that at the  weekend  local residents and their guests may  have a few more car parks in the  neighbouring streets  um to invite guests so there is a real  improvement with this as well as perhaps  a slight bit  of more pressure in the mornings but as  I said I don't know that that pressure  will be as pronounced as some people may  fear that it will be.  it's difficult though and it is very  congested but I think on balance  given the fact that the church has other  facilities in the area  given the fact that it is an area where  there's a lot of activity  I think on balance I will see how we go  with this with the officer's  recommendation. I understand that people may have  concerns but I think those concerns  can be addressed and have been addressed  quite vociferously by the officers  and I thank the officers for their work. 
Thank you Councillor Hurd for your response.  Councillor Healey as seconder do you wish  to speak now or reserve your rights?  I'll reserve my right mr chair. Thank you  councillor Healey. Any other councillor seeking to speak to this item this evening? Councillor  Hollingsworth has gestured  thank you. Thank you mr chair  um it's not that I don't want to support  the application the concern I have is predominantly just with the  car parking request dispensation um  when I asked earlier if I could ask the  second question the second question was  going to be  that I would have liked to foreshadowed an  alternate motion  that would still support the application  but with consideration to car parking  is that something that I can speak to  now or is that later? 
Councillor Hollingsworth we're in  debate should this motion  fail then you're more than welcome to  consider your  alternative motion. Thank you. Do you wish to speak to this motion? Nothing further at this stage thank you. Thank you councillor Hollingsworth. Councillor Watson I think you foreshadowed do you wish to speak? Yes thank you chair I'll keep my remarks  brief  my concerns uh are the same as councillor  Hollingsworth I do believe as Councillor Hurd  uh eloquently put to us that there is a  need for this area and in some  respects uh when the  child care centre is not in operation the  car park will be  very appreciated and certainly having  experienced what  traffic is like on the weekend when  people attend religious services  I'm sure that reducing the impact on the  neighbourhood by having this  extra car parking is a good thing but  the extra parking is not compliant  and uh therefore I will not support this  I believe that the applicant needs to  comply with our car parking requirements  and should we have the opportunity to  support  or consider a motion where we are  talking about compliant parking  I will be supporting that so that is my  only objection to this application.  All the other remarks that councillor Hurd made regarding the need  in this area I fully support and agree with but I don't support reducing  parking so I'll leave my remarks there  thank you.  
Thank you councillor Watson. Councillor Sinfield. Thank you chair um I concur with the  remarks made by councillor Watson  and others my concern is largely  around parking  um and I'm not satisfied with a parking  study from November 2018 is sufficiently contemporaneous to give me any comfort that that parking  still remains available in the local  area.  I've a long-held belief that any  development should be  parking neutral not have any further  impact on the surrounding area  and be fully self-sufficient within the  boundary of the site  and my opinion on that will not  waver on this occasion.  I am delighted that the site is set  to see a new future and I think that the  concept of putting a child  care centre into church grounds is admirable and it would be a pleasure for you know for parents to drop off  children and enjoy those grounds and  those buildings  those that are set to remain but um but  my concerns   are around the parking and  because of that I won't support the  motion that's on the table tonight.  
Thank you councillor Sinfield any other  councillors seeking to speak, Councillor Addis. Thank you very much chair um I wanted  to reiterate that my  as others have said that my only concern  is the parking I agree with  councillor Hurd that this um  application has  a lot to offer  and will be a benefit to the community  but I'm struck by the bedlam that schools  create in   local traffic demands on a local area  and this will increase the demands and  if  it can't necessarily provide its own car  parking  then these people will be competing for  the  few car parks that might be available um  along with  parents who are of the school children  who are also trying to find  um car parks thus just increasing the  difficulty in the neighbourhood so um I’d be comfortable even if they weren't  totally compliant but I’d like them to  get um a little bit closer if not  totally compliant  thank you chair. 
Thank you councillor Addis  um are there any other councillors seeking to speak this evening  councillor Healey as the seconder. Thanks mr chair I think my microphone's  on. It is correct. yeah um look  the area surrounding this uh  well on the other side of the street  used to be part of my ward there's a  park  over the road there is the primary  school there to a large extent  in this part of Hawthorn and the old  Kew ward that was  across the road it's a lot of resident  parking protection  so while people might come to the view  that there's not enough parking  actually on the site I think it will be  self-regulating to a large extent. It  also enjoys  excellent public transport with the  trams  both in heading in both directions  around the edges of the property so I think you'll find that this site won't  be an impost  for parking around it when it's in  operation. We badly need in this part of Hawthorn, Hawthorn being part of the  fastest growing in density  in Boroondara we need more services for  young families  and I find that and I would ask others  to think about the way that this will  self-regulate  and you may also affect the viability of  the proposal  if we go to reduce the numbers I don't  think it's necessary to reduce the  numbers I think it will self-regulate  and we need  something like this in this part of  Boroondara so I'll be supporting the  proposal and ask others  to I suppose look at the car parking  issue I'd say the officers would never  put up anything that was non-compliant  they have to deal with a number of  factors  and so when they deal with everything in  balance they get a compliant outcome  otherwise it wouldn't be coming to us it  would have been rejected  so there's been a couple of  comments about it being non-compliant I would say  perhaps on one factor you might say yes  but then planning is more art than  science  and it only needs to be generally in  accordance with. So I would ask people to think about the  benefits to the community that this will  provide. I think the parking will regulate itself  and for that reason I'll support the  motion and the proposal as is thank you.  
Thank you councillor Healey um there  appears to be councillor Parke are  you seeking to speak? uh just to endorse  the comments by councillor Healey he actually said what pretty much  what I was going to say so I won't add  to it other than  to endorse his remarks.  Thank you councillor Parke any other  councillors before I return to the mover of the motion, appears to be none, councillor Hurd. Chair thank you chair and I thank all councillors for their  contribution. The main reason that I think we need to  pass this as is is there's one that Councillor Healey  said it will be self-regulating which is  something I forgot to mention  b there is a lot of other parking around  the area c there could be a delay not just  to the provision of the service for the  sake of one or two car spots and nobody  has been more  ardent than me about parking in Hawthorn particularly in about you know  really sticking close to car parking  requirements and with all the  developments that we've had in  both spac and on upsc that I've always  been very strong on that but on this  occasion for those very reasons  I think that this project is a little  bit different in fact it adds to the  local car parking capacity.  
For the sake of one or two car spots  we're going to delay this project by  perhaps a year a year and a half we're  going to put  council to perhaps further expense and  certainly the proponents who are  a church to further expenditure  um for something that that may be  seen as fairly minor in the  in the final analysis and so when you're  this close  is it really worth rate payers resources  and money  uh to risk sort of that delay  that inordinate delay particularly with  the redevelopment of west hawthorn  school  and the parents that are asking for  these services  is it really worth risking that level of  delay   for the sake of one or two car spots  and that's the question I'd leave those  who are doubted doubtful of this motion.  
Thank you councillor Hurd for your  right of reply. I will now put this motion to the  vote and I'll  run through each Councillor individually,  councillor Ross  are you in support of this motion, no.  Councillor Sinfield are you in support  of this motion,  no I'm not supporting this motion.  Councillor Watson are you in support of  this motion,   no chair I'm not. Councillor Parke are you in support of this  motion,  yes chair. Councillor Wegman  are you in support of this motion, yes. Councillor Addis are you in support of  this motion,  uh no chair I'm not.  Councillor Hollingsworth are you in support of this motion, no chair. Uh we up to councillor Healey are you in  support of this motion,  yes chair. Councillor Hurd are you in support of this motion, yes chair.  and I will declare that I'm not in  support of this motion  and the numbers have failed this motion  so that motion is uh declined I'm  now in search of a new motion. 
Councillors is there a new motion. Councillor Hollingsworth. Thank you mr chair have I've been unmuted yes  before you speak councillor Hollingsworth, sorry yes if you can speak to your motion. Thank you. Can you speak Councillor Hollingsworth to your motion. Sorry chair I'm having some audio and  visual problems  unfortunately, um the motion I would like  to  propose is to be  car park compliant so  in order to do that I would  request that the number of enrolments be  reduced to be car park compliant. 
Thank you and I think we might have a  motion  shortly to come up on the screen. So I'll just read out this part,  the number of child places reduced to a  maximum  of 104 children and planning permit  condition  21 amended to  reflect the above, I think if I recall correctly officers addressed the  last 104  students meant that there was no  dispensation councillor Hollingsworth is  that your  motion? It is chair thank you. Thank you. To assist Councillor Hollingsworth is there a seconder to this motion.  Councillor Addis thank you. Again to assist Councillor Hollingsworth is  anyone opposed to this motion. Councillor Parke, Councillor Hurd, potentially councillor Sinfield, Councillor Wegman.  
As the mover councillor  Hollingsworth I will pass to you. Thank you mr chair as I mentioned  earlier I concur with the comments councillor  Hurd said in support of the application  with the exception of the car park  compliance. I do know the area reasonably well I have been there at peak times in  particular  school drop-off it is already a highly  congested area  and with the expansion of the primary  school and then the addition of the  child care centre I believe every single park car park is  crucial.  The issue is not so much about whether  it be  one two or three car parks it's more  about the quantity of children  that equates to the use of the car parks  the parents and carers probably not for  children.  So if the number of  children being able to be registered in  the child care centre  could be reduced to be car park compliant then I believe that it's an excellent  application. 
I think architecturally it's very  considered of the heritage area  it's a incredible building very well  thought out  landscape fencing design tick all the  boxes  and knowing the area as I said also  knowing that it's grown  a lot in residential  capacity in the last 12 months to two  years,  I believe when the parking study was  done there has been  considerable growth which would then be  putting more pressure on the residential  area very very  close to this location and  if the development was car park  compliant I believe that the residents would be  more satisfied  and it would be a better outcome for the community  as a whole thank you. 
Thank you Councillor Hollingsworth. Councillor Addis as seconder do you  wish to speak now  or reserve your rights um thank you  chair I'll speak briefly.  What I'm seeking is either compliance or  something  that approaches  compliance so I'm certainly happy to support this  new motion but should it fail I'd  also be happy to support something  that reflected a halfway point. I'm very happy to support something that  seeks compliance.  
Thank you councillor Addis  any other councillors wishing to speak  on this item? Councillor Sinfield. Thank you chair without wanting to  draw officers into debate I'm  wondering if there might be an alternate  to this in my mind  so rather than reducing the number of  children to 104 I'm wondering if officers are of the belief that these sites could  accommodate the additional car parking  required to make it  compliant, through you if you're  willing to permit the question. Thank you councillor Sinfield and I do not  want to draw officers into the debates but if mr Mitchell could potentially answer this  question. 
Thanks through you mr chair officers have looked to see whether  there is a possibility of providing some  additional car parking on site. in our view that would be very difficult  to do  and would potentially create a range of  other issues  such as removal of more vegetation  so in our view the answer to that would  be   no we don't think it would be reasonably possible thank you. 
Thank you mr Mitchell. Councillor Sinfield we are in debate do you wish to speak to  this item? No thank you chair. Thank you. Any other councillors seeking to speak to this  item before I return to the, oh councillor Hurd. Yes thank you  thank you look the reason I supported  the original motion was almost  pretty much because of what mr Mitchell just said there's there is a lot of tree  life in the area as well  and there's been concern from residents  about the removal of trees. If you reduce the numbers of people at  the child care centre then that creates  other problems. Having said that I'll be voting against this motion  because I did believe that the  given the fact that I've gone through  this issue for a long time I know that we've reached a happy medium. The only other observation I would make  is if this were a normal meeting we  would be able to adjourn and speak with  the proponent and see if there was any  negotiation possible,  but we can't so we're now in this  position  so thank you.  
Thank you councillor Hurd, any other councillors wishing to speak to this  item before I return  to the mover? Councillor Hollingsworth, oh before you do speak councillor Hollingsworth we have a late gesture from councillor Healey. Sorry for my late indication can you hear me? Yes. Look I'll be voting against  this because I think to reduce the  number of  children on site is a poor outcome in  our community  and I think it would be better for us to  go if this motion fails it would be  better for us to go back to the original  motion  and leave it with  and try it again because I honestly feel  that the original motion is the best  motion  and it is a compromise given the aspects of this. The residential interface of this  particular  site is very small and  as such I don't think there are a lot of  residents that will be impacted by this  in any particular way that they're not  already impacted by. So for those reasons um I'll be voting  against the   present motion and would foreshadow  to go and try the original motion again  should this fail  thank you. 
Thank you councillor Healey I believe councillor Parke. Thank you chair I was just going  to pick up on the indication by  councillor Addis   that she'd entertain her some sort of a halfway point I mean I'm willing to  move an amendment to this but the difficulty is because I'd you know I the other option is that this as councillor Healey suggested gets defeated again but I wonder if I don't want to just uh move an amendment that that then  still can't garner majority support but I wonder if for the sake of saving time whether  there might be some possibility of uh I mean I'm I suppose what I'm saying  is I'm of a similar mind to councillor Addis   but I don't know what number ought to  be put on things   so  my endeavour is to try and avoid us being back to round three here.  
Thank you councillor Parke just before I pass to you councillor Watson I'm just  going to seek  from councillor Hollingsworth a  willingness to   make an amendment to her current  alternative motion and councillor Parke you might seek to  give some guidance I know  officers did  include a dispensation of one car  parking space of 109 or 2 car parking  spaces of 113.  Councillor Hollingsworth are you would  you be amenable to.  
Thank you mr chair um I would because I do actually want to support the  application I hope it is successful  but I do believe it's important to get  the right balance of the  car park per child ratio  because of the fact that the school is  using a shared  road access into this and there's going  to be a lot of  parents and carers competing for car  park particularly at that drop off time in the morning so yes I would  support  what councillor Parke has suggested.  Councillor Hollingsworth before you  disappear do you have a number in mind  we've got  uh 113 which is two  car parking spaces or one car parking  spaces  at 109. Look I would like to say the removal of  two,  sorry to consider the two car parks  but if there's the majority support for  one I would also  support that. Could you just confirm  if there was dispensation for one car  park  that would be 113 children maximum  enrolment is that correct? So mr Mitchell.  
Thanks through you mr chair that's right so  if we reduced the reduction  from three down to two we're  looking at a cap of 113 children.  If we're looking to reduce  the reduction being sought from three  down to one  we're looking at 109 children thank you. Look I would support the first option  to cap it to cap 113 children  because I believe going from the  original 120 children  that was first requested in the  application by reducing that by 7 children to 113 I believe that would achieve  quite a significant result.  Okay we might just see if  councillor Addis are you happy to also accept that as the if you were previous seconder weren't you Councillor Addis are you happy to, sorry can we just get your microphone on. Thank you chair yes I am happy to  accept the figure of 113.  
Thank you and if we can  able to get that up on the screen if  that's possible. Okay so this alternate motion for  approval by councillor Hollingsworth seconded by  councillor Addis the number of child places reduced to a  maximum of 113  children planning permit condition 21 as  amended to reflect  the above. Councillor Hollingsworth just  to confirm that is your motion and  councillor Addis you are happy to second one. Yes mr chair. Yes chair thank you. Thank you and to  assist councillor Hollingsworth again  is there any opposition to this item. Councillor Wegman  and councillor Hurd.  Thank you councillor Hollingsworth do you seek to speak to this again? 
Just briefly mr chair I just want to  thank councillor Parke and councillor Addis for  putting forward the recommendation to  consider middle ground  and I also wanted to acknowledge the  comments of  councillor Healey and look I do agree  there is an urgent need Hawthorn is one of the largest growth  areas if not the largest growth area of Boroondara,  but the one point councillor Healey made with regard to tram access I don't believe assists in this  situation because most  parents taking children to child care   would be armed with quite a lot of  equipment whether it be  nappy bags clothing bags pushers pram  strollers   it's a challenge often to get into  daycare  tram isn't always the best option. I think typically most parents would drive  those fortunate enough to live within walking distance could walk but I think the vast majority would drive and I believe that this is a fair and balanced outcome that will enable the project to proceed thank you. 
Thank you councillor Hollingsworth. Council Addis do you wish to speak now or reserve your rights? No I have  nothing I need to say thank you chair. Thank you councillor Addis  any other councillors wishing to  speak to this item. I have councillor Hurd. Councillor Hurd. If we can just unmute Councillor Hurd. Okay thank you as the ward councillor I will reluctantly support this I think it's more posturing  than helpful because I just don't think  this is going to make any difference  and I think we might have been able to  negotiate something better but I'll support it I appreciate the context  but as I said I really don't think this  is you know going to  make I think officers have done a great  job and thank you to them.  
Thank you again councillor Hurd. Any other councillors wishing to speak  to this item  this evening before I return  to the mover. Councillor Hollingsworth. Thank you mr chair I just like to thank everyone for their  participation in the conversation  and would like to close also in  thanking the officers. I understand this has been 14 months in the planning  and a lot of consultation  and response and I'm  pleased that this resolution  hopefully will be supported and the  project can proceed  thank you. Thank you councillor Hollingsworth I will now put this motion and  individually  ask each counsellor if they're in favour.  Councillor Hollingsworth, yes. Councillor Addis,  yes. Councillor Ross, yes. Councillor Sinfield,  yes. Councillor Parke,  yes chair. Councillor Wegman, no. Councillor Healey, reluctantly yes. Councillor Hurd, reluctantly yes.  And I declare that I also am in favour of  this  so I declare this motion has passed. Chair. Yes. Sorry chair to interrupt but you didn't ask me  for my vote. Oh councillor Watson. Thank you chair I support the motion. Thank you councillor Watson you must  have dropped off the screen then for a minute. I still declare that that motion is carried thank you councillors.  
Move on to the next item of  business which is item 3.4 VCAT decisions and decisions under delegation January 2020.  This will be introduced by mr Simon Mitchell manager of statutory  planning. Thank you mr chair so this  report sets out  the delegated planning decisions made  and the vcat decisions received during January  and the officer recommendation is that  the report be received and noted  thank you.  Thank you mr Mitchell. We do have a  question  from councillor Ross,  I don't have a question but I’m happy to  foreshadow moving a motion when the time is appropriate.  Thank you. Any questions from councillors, there appears to be none. Councillor Ross. 
Thank you mr chair as you can see  from this report  there were 93 applications which were  decided in the month of January  and there are also seven vcat decisions  but I draw your attention to one vcat  decision in particular  which is 368 Auburn Road. 368 Auburn Road might trigger some memories with people because this particular property was  demolished just before Christmas. This  was one of the properties  which was allowed to be demolished  because it fitted into  the planning minister's loophole that  was  that this property was allowed to be  demolished in Boroondara, had this  property been in  any other municipality in the state it  would not have been able to have been  demolished. 
And as you can see from this particular  planning application this application  now  that vcat has approved 17 dwellings with  a basement.  Obviously we're grateful that the  minister did remove  Boroondara's special amendment which  allowed this type of thing to happen  but we have lost a heritage property  in Hawthorn because of this amendment  and because of this amendment we will  now have 17 dwellings with the basement. I just wanted to draw everybody's  attention to that vcat decision  that took place in January just a short  while  after the house was demolished.  
Thank you councillor Ross I believe I need  a seconder for your motion  is there a councillor prepared to second I think councillor Addis you may have  just snuck in there.   Councillor Addis is a seconder do you  wish to speak to  the motion. Sorry Councillor Addis just your microphone. To support what councillor Ross said and  to thank the officers.  Thank you councillor Addis, any other  councillors seeking to speak to this  item,  there appears to be none. Councillor Ross. I think I've said everything thank you  mr chair. Thank  you thank you Councillor Ross I will now put this  motion through each councillors individually starting with councillor Sinfield do you support this motion? Yes I do chair. Thank you councillor Sinfield. Councillor Watson, yes chair I support the motion. Councillor Parke, yes chair.  Councillor Ross, yes mr chair. Councillor Wegman, yes. Councillor Hollingsworth, yes. Councillor Healey, that was a yes mr chair I saw the  language.  Councillor Addis, yes chair. And I also declare that I'm  supporting this motion so I declare the  motion  carried unanimously thank you councillors. You didn't ask me. Oh councillor Hurd I do apologize  these um videos are jumping all  around the place  apologies councillor Hurd. Yes I support the motion. Thank you councillor Hurd I again  declare this  motion carried unanimously thank you  councillors.  Um we live in a virtual world at the  moment and you're all moving around my  screen.
We'll move on to item 3.5 vcat  decisions and  decisions under delegation February 2020  again  introduced by mr Mitchell Manager of statutory planning. Thanks thank you mr chair through you  so this is a  similar report it's the delegated decisions made during February  and the vcat decisions that have been  received for the same month  and the recommendation again is that the  report be received  and noted. Thank you mr Mitchell. And councillors  any questions of the officers,  there appears to be none. I'm in search  of a motion,  councillor Parke, seconded Councillor Healey. Councillor Parke. The officer's recommendation, yes correct. Thank you and councillor  Healey as seconder. Yes mr chair. Are any other councillors seeking to speak to  this item otherwise I'll pass to councillor Parke. No.
I will now put this motion to the vote starting with councillor Hurd you're the  first on my screen this time councillor Hurd are you in favour, yes chair I'm in favour. Thank you. Councillor Addis,  yes chair in favour.  Councillor Ross, yes in favour. Councillor Sinfield, yes I'm in favour. Councillor Parke, yes chair. Councillor Watson, yes chair. Councillor Wegman, yes. Councillor Hollingsworth, yes chair. And no other councillors I haven't asked so I'm also in favour I declare that carried. 
We'll move onto item 3.6 VCAT decisions and delegations, decisions under delegation March 2020 again mr  Mitchell will  introduce this item. Thank you mr chair  again this is the this report sets out  the  decisions made under delegation and  the vcat decisions received during March  and the recommendation again is to  receive and note thank you.  Thank you mr Mitchell. Councillors any  questions.  Councillor Hollingsworth is that a  question.  so supporting the motion when the  time's right. I believe that might be the time Councillor Hollingsworth and council Ross as the seconder  thank you. Any councillors wishing to  speak to this item.  Councillor Hollingsworth. 
Thank you mr  chair just looking at the report considering that we've been going  through coronavirus pandemic   it's incredible to see that 84  applications were  processed under delegation  whether it was notice of decision  refusing or permit granted I think it's an amazing achievement  considering the  complexities of working remotely and  processing applications  and also the fact that there is 10 VCAT results in March as well which is wonderful to see so whilst we always  don't get the outcome we  anticipate nonetheless the applications have been processed  so I just wanted to thank mr Mitchell  and his department. 
Thank you councillor Hollingsworth I will  now put this motion to the vote. Councillor Ross, in favour. Thank you. Councillor Parke, in favour chair. Councillor Sinfield, in favour chair. Councillor Healey. Councillor Wegman, yes. Councillor Watson, in favour chair. Councillor Addis, in favour chair. Councillor Hurd, yes I'm in favour. Thank you and  councillor Hollingsworth, yes Mr Chair.  And I am also in favour I'll declare  that motion carried unanimously thank  you councillors.  
Move on to item four general business  councillors are there any items of  general business. There appears to be no items of general  business. Item five  items of urgent business are there any  items of urgent business,  there appears to be no items of urgent  business. Confidential business,  are there any items are confidential, there  appears to be none. Well thank you to the members of the  community  who viewed this evening online for the  first time  in the city of Boroondara's history. I do declare  that this first virtual meeting of the  urban planning special meeting is closed. Thank you for your attendance  thank you officers  and thank you all councillors.