Some of our services are closed or have different hours over Easter, from Friday 29 March to Monday 1 April.

Video URL
Duration
36:01
Audio description
Transcript

Welcome everyone to tonight's meeting of the urban planning special committee. My name is councillor Garry Thompson and I chair this committee.


The health safety and well-being of the community has and always will be paramount consideration for council. Council continues to be guided by the government directives and wants to be able to do the right thing for the health of the community during the COVID-19 pandemic.


The COVID-19 omnibus emergency measures act 2020 passed by the Victorian Parliament on the 23rd of April 2020 includes changes to the Local Government Act 2020 which affected the conduct of council meetings. The changes became effective from the first of May 2020.


Council is now able to hold virtual meetings and councillors can participate in meetings remotely by electronic means of communication. The urban planning special committee meeting is being live-streamed on the council website so you will be able to view the Proceedings of the meeting, councillor deliberations and voting.


The meeting will also be recorded and will be made available on the council website as soon as practically possible after the meeting. Should technical problems be encountered by the committee then the meeting will be adjourned until resolution or postponed. 


I will start by introducing my fellow councillors and officers who are present this evening for the meeting of the urban planning special committee meeting and councillors if I can just ask you to identify that you are present when I call out your name.


Councillor Addis, present chair. Councillor Healey, present. Councillor Hurd, yes thank you chair apologies for the delay the windows decided to update itself but we're right now apologies to everybody. Thank You Councillor Hurd. Councillor Hollingsworth, present. Thank you Councillor Hollingsworth. Councillor Parke, good evening. Councillor Ross, present chair. Councillor Sinfield, good evening everyone. Councillor Wegman, present. And the mayor Councillor Watson, present chair. Thank you.


We also have our Chief Executive Officer mr. Phillip Storer with us this evening, Director of City Planning Shiran Wickramasinghe, Manager Statutory Planning mr. Simon Mitchell, Manager of Governance 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'll be introduced as they present their report.


The purpose of the urban planning special committee essentially is to deal with issues under the Planning and Environment Act and the building act. The committee has delegated authority to make decisions on behalf of council. Councillors are familiar with the report which includes a summary of all objections received.


Tonight we will be facilitating public submissions so that members of the community or applicants can address councillors. I will call you individually when the time is to make your presentation and you'll be placed into the meeting so that you can make your presentation.


If you're making a submission please present your view points clearly and concisely on why you support or oppose the planning application. If you are opposed to the planning application please inform the committee why you're opposed and suggest an alternative approach which would satisfy your concerns.


Please don't repeat what earlier speakers have said and keep the submissions focused on relevant issues and points not previously raised. Please focus on your concerns rather than matters of history or details in the officers report. 


There will be a strict time limit of three minutes for each speaking including councillors whilst as chairperson I reserve the right I seldom do extend. At the two and a half minute mark I will indicate that you have 30 seconds to remain and then I'll conclude you at the three minutes. 


I will now move on to the order of business as listed in our business papers. Apologies, mr. Thompson have we received any apologies this evening. Through you mr chair there are no apologies for this evening. Thank You mr. Thompson.


Moving on to item 1 adoption and confirmation of the minutes of the UPSC meeting held on the 18th of May. Councillors I'm in search of a motion. Councillor Hollingsworth, as circulated mr. chair. Thank you. Can I seek a seconder. Councillor Addis, Thank You councillor Addis. 


Is there any opposition, there appears to be none. I will now put this to the vote. All those in favour I will call you out, councillor Ross in favour, councillor Sinfield in favour, Councillor Parke in favour, councillor Watson in favour, councillor Wegman in favour, councillor Addis in favour, councillor Hollingsworth in favour, councillor Healey and myself councillor Thompson and councillor Hurd thank you councillor Hurd. 


Move on to item 2 declaration of conflict of interest of any councillor or council officer. Are there any conflicts this evening, there appears to be no conflicts. 


Item three point one presentation of officers reports 1300-1302 Toorak Road, Camberwell. This report will be introduced by Leo Bosley senior statutory planner. Thank You mr. chair. I present UPC item 3.1 associated for land at 1300-1302 Toorak Road in Camberwell. Made up of two lots known as 1300 Toorak Road and 1302 Toorak Road.


The subject site is located in the general residential zone schedule 1 and is not subject to any overlays. The subject site has an existing planning permit issued by Council. The existing permit allows for the construction of a three-story building comprising 20 apartments and two townhouses, subdivision of the land into two lots and removal of an easement. 


In comparison the proposal seeks permission for the construction of twelve townhouses above basement over two lots and the removal of an easement. It is considered the proposal is a significant improvement when compared to the existing permit. Of note their proposal includes the following improvements, an overall reduction in the number of dwellings from 22 to 11, the reduction in the number of vehicle movements from 154 to 72 per day, a reduction in site coverage from fifty four point five percent to forty nine point nine percent and increased landscaping opportunities including the proposed planting of thirty-one canopy trees throughout the site compared to previously there was fourteen.


It was also noted the proposed development is consistent with the existing permit which respects the provision of a two-story transition to the adjoining property at number two Clitheroe court. At this interface the proposal includes a two-story townhouse with a roof terrace.


The roof terrace will be screened in accordance with the overlooking standard of res code standard B22 and then measured to the top of the roof terrace balustrade is lower in height compared to the building height of the existing approval.


The application was advertised in August 2019 a total of 14 objections were received. The key issues raised in the objections related to neighbourhood character and the massive bulk of the development to Albemarle Court and Clitheroe court, run setbacks to Toorak Road Albemarle Court and Clitheroe Court, amenity impacts to adjoining residential properties, the removal of trees on site and impacts to a neighboring tree, car Parking design a lack of on-site car Parking for residents and no provision of visitor car Parking spaces, and finally increased traffic generation congestion and hazards in Clitheroe court. 


All matters raised by objectors have been addressed in the delegates report. 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 Clitheroe Court or the surrounding road network and subject to the recommended conditions the safe movement of vehicles in and out of the site will be ensured.


The application meets the requirements of clause 50 206 in relation to the provision of on-site car Parking and does not seek a car Parking waiver. The proposed development is also compliant with the garden area requirement and a three story and ten metre maximum building height requirement of the general residential zone schedule 1.


It is considered there is a strategic basis for locating a multi-dwelling development in this location noting the Boroondara housing framework seeks to facilitate and support development including townhouses on land within the general residential zone schedule 1.


It is also considered the proposal is consistent with the outcome sought by council's neighbourhood character policy and the preferred character statement. The development proposes a two-story transition to number one Clitheroe court and subject to the recommended conditions a 5 meter building setback is proposed from the property at number 2 Albemarle Court.


This is consistent with the existing approval on the subject site and it provides an appropriate transition from the urban character of Toorak Road to the traditional suburban interface of Clitheroe Court and Albemarle Court. It is also considered the proposed development presents as a well-articulated building to Toorak Road and both side streets  utilizing a contemporary materials palette that references the predominant materials in the surrounding area.


Subject to conditions council's Urban designer considers the proposed development to be a more refined built form outcome that would be a valuable addition to Toorak Road and adjoining streets when compared to the existing planning permit on the site. 


With respect to the sites interfaces with residential properties to the south at number 2 Albemarle court and number one Clitheroe Court the development achieves full compliance with Res code in terms of its rear setbacks overshadowing and overlooking subject to a recommended condition to screen the south-facing window. It is recommended that council issue a notice of decision to grant a planning permit subject to the conditions detailed in the report and officers recommendation thank you.


Thank You mr. Bosley for your presentation. We have two written submissions against the officers recommendations I will now call upon the manager of Statutory Planning mr. Mitchell to read out both submissions to the meeting.


Thank you and through you mr. chair. The first submission is from Grant and Michelle Wigg of one Clitheroe Court in Glen Iris. Councillors we refer to the application for a planning permit pp19 slash zero zero zero six seven for 1300-1302 Toorak Road, Camberwell. 


We strongly object to the granting of approval for this application and request that you refuse to approve it in its current form without our suggested modifications. There have been 14 objections received by council relating to this specific application all coming from residents in the immediate vicinity of the site. 


These objections detail the significant impact that the development would have on the residents in our two courts which are affected. The main concerns that we have to this application are the rooftop terrace on the top of townhouse one at third level above-ground will facilitate and encourage an invasion of our privacy in our secluded private open space.


People on this rooftop terrace will be looking into our yard from a height of approximately 7.3 meters according to the provided elevation drawing. The balustrade will clearly not stop this invasion of privacy. It should be noted that the council removed a proposed third level from this townhouse in the previous permit PP 15/00619 then the developer took it to VCAT to get it reinstated and VCAT decided after visiting the site that the third level should not be allowed.


We will take this to VCAT if this third level is allowed. Our seventeen-year-old daughter often sunbakes on this decking on the north side of our property sometimes without clothing. If this Terrace is allowed this will place her in a very unsafe position. The window in the southern corner of the first-floor bedroom of townhouse one will likewise facilitate an invasion of our privacy.


We also do not want to see into that bedroom from our room windows on our north side. The submitted plans by the applicants show there are no windows doors or outdoor living areas on the north side of our building. There are many windows a double door and outdoor dining and barbecue area and a decking area which will be subject to this invasion of our privacy.


It is not reasonable for council to approve a permit that allows such an intrusion into our secluded private open space. It would be a significant increase in traffic into and out of our Court as a result of this development going head in its current form. Being a court we have no alternative way of getting out of the court just one entry exit onto Toorak Road. 


This development is not sympathetic to the buildings in the immediate area we have predominantly Art Deco period homes in the 1930s. A large development of this type will significantly devalue all the homes in the area. The suggested alterations that we request are for the removal of the rooftop terrace on townhouse one to stop the gross invasion of privacy into the secluded private open space of our property at 1 Clitheroe Court. 


Removal of the floor-to-ceiling unobscured windows on the southwest corner of town house one that grossly invades the privacy of the secluded private open space of our North facing living areas of our property. 


Reduce the number of townhouses to a maximum of 6 in total. Reduce the height of each townhouse. That is three minutes on the presentation is there much more to come. Four more dot points mr. chair. If you can quickly continue on those. 


Thank you. Reduce the height of each townhouse by reducing them to two stories rather than three stories so they are more aligned with the houses in the immediate area. Increase the size of the secluded private and open space of each of the six townhouses to make them more appealing to future residents of these townhouses. The site to provide some internal visitor spaces and retention of significant trees thank you.


Thank you mr. Mitchell I believe there is um take questions because there's no presenter here but mr. Mitchell if you can move on to your second presentation.


Thank You mr. chair the second presentation is from Amanda Sinclair and Warren Pryer from 12 Albemarle court. Our objections to the application are the physical visible visual scale as the property does not comply with the six metre setback requirements to the paths of TH6 and TH9 at the northeastern Albemarle court and northwestern Clitheroe Court.


Setbacks of two and three metres on the eastern and western parts not consistent with the existing home setbacks in Albemarle and Clitheroe courts. A height of three storeys is not consistent with the existing maximum two-story structures in Albemarle and Clitheroe courts. 


It is already on an elevated block thereby further increasing its visual scale. It is out of keeping with the predominantly single dwellings of Albemarle and Clitheroe courts and size and structure overall will impose a visual urban bulk and feel to the garden and neighbourhood aspect of both Albemarle and Clitheroe courts.


Increased traffic in local streets as Albemarle and Clitheroe courts are short narrow cul-de-sac roadways not designed for high-density traffic flow and traffic cannot easily turn at the end of the courts due to the small size of the roadway and the added impediment of existing cars on roads.


Insufficient on-site Parking due to only two car parks per four-bedroom townhouses some of which would be used by residents for storage and no visitor Parking at all. Increased hazard for children given Albemarle and Clitheroe courts are highly regarded due to their proximity to Hartwell primary school and current residents include preschool and primary age children who use the paths and end of the court for scooter and ball play. 


And additional traffic in the courts poor visibility due to increased Parking and high volume of cars crossing pedestrian areas using driveways to turn increases the risks to our children's welfare. Increase hazard for vehicles entering and exiting Clitheroe and Albemarle  courts as traffic is heavy along Toorak road in the morning and again from 3 p.m. onwards.


With increased parked cars at the courts entrance greater numbers of cars entering and exiting the court and a rise coming into the court residents are at greater risk and there are no other alternative for entry exit into Albemarle court and Clitheroe court.  


Reduced greenery due to the reduction to the very large tree tree number 16 at number 2 Albemarle court which is very much a feature of the court. Removal of other street trees and townhouses having insufficient garden for the introduction maintaining and mature trees. 


In keeping with the current neighbourhood aspect and amenity. 30 seconds mr. Mitchell. and it's narrow single entry roadway requested changes are the size and dwelling density reduced to six townhouses of no greater than two stories. Minimum three car parks per townhouse. Increased garden area and retaining existing mature trees. 


Residents of Boroondara consistently value the garden and mature trees of our suburbs and sense of community and safety all of which we have enjoyed over the last 16 years since we purchased our home in a small cul-de-sac of Albemarle court. We greatly appreciate council's support in these matters to retain this amenity Thank You mr. chair.


Thank You mr. Mitchell for reading out those two submissions. Officers will also assist us with this we do have one speaker in support of the officers recommendation wishing to make a submission, so I will call upon mr Fidel Freijah if you can come on and once you're up.


Good evening everyone. Thank You mr. Freijah if we can for the record commence with your name, address and interest in whether you're for or against the officer's recommendation. 


Sure. Fidel Freijah. Urbis pty ltd at level 12 120 Collins Street in Melbourne. I'm acting as the town planning consultant on behalf of JSK property the proponent for this application. You may commence with your presentation thank you.


Thank you. Thank you to Leo all councillors and tonight's UPC chairperson. My client purchased this site with an existing planning permit approval in place for a three-story building plus basement containing 20 apartments and two townhouses approved by council in August of 2016.


In lieu of pursuing the higher density apartment scheme the clients vision for the site was to utilize it for a high-end townhouse development which maximizes the three street frontages afforded to the site which we considered to be a far superior development outcome by way of the building's high-quality contemporary and well articulated architectural expression.


The response to the respective streetscapes through provision of dedicated dwelling entries interfacing directly with those streetscapes which enhances the sense of address and activation. The sensitively designed interfaces with the immediate residential abutals  to the south and the townhouse dwelling typology which in comparison to the apartment approval reduces density and better aligns with the site's housing context.


The proposal aligns directly with the objectives of the general residential zone one in that it complies entirely with the height controls in garden area requirement. It is respectful to neighbourhood character and contributes to housing diversity within this well serviced area. 


It also aligns with local policy which nominates this location is want to facilitate moderate change including villas apartments and townhouses. A high degree of res code compliance ensures that all dwellings proposed are afforded a suitable level of amenity both internal and external whilst minimizing offsite amenity impacts to adjoining properties.


In resolving the building footprint for this proposal we largely align the southern boundary setbacks and building scale with that of the previous approval albeit we consider this outcome to represent an improvement in that it now includes a central void which facilitates the courtyards for each townhouse which in fact provides a substantial break in the built form therefore improving the outlook from those southern neighboring sites.


Full compliance with car and bicycle Parking requirements is achieved through provision of private garages for each dwelling at basement level which accommodate all vehicle and bicycle Parking. 30 seconds Mr Freijah. thank you. Whilst elevator access is provided for 10 of the 11 dwellings with ah that is private elevator access ensuring DDA accessibility to all levels of those dwellings is provided.


The proposal provides opportunities for canopy tree planting within the prominent Toorak road corners of the site whilst additional landscaping opportunities are provided in the foreground and courtyards of each townhouse as well as along the southern boundary interfaces.


Thank You mr. Freijah for your presentation. Thank You mr. chair. Councillors are there any questions of mr. Freijah, there appears to be none thank you for your presentation this evening. Thank you for your time. 


I'll now turn to matters arising, mr Bosley are there any matters arising this evening. Thank You mr. chair I would just like to take the opportunity to respond to the submissions made by the objectors. I would just like to begin with the matters raised by mr. Wigg of number one Clitheroe court. 


With respect to the overlooking from the town house one rooftop terrace the area is treated with thick obscure balustrading to a height of 1.7 meters above finish floor level on the southern and western elevations. This is in accordance with res code standards. It is considered to be an acceptable design response to address overlooking.


With respects to the rooftop terrace not being in accordance with the existing approval on the subject site it's something that I touched on briefly before that while the proposed scheme now includes a rooftop terrace on this townhouse it is noted the townhouse continues to have a maximum of two storeys and when measured to the top of the rooftop terrace balustrade has a lower building height when compared to the existing approval.


The existing approval had a wall height of approximately 7.3 meters along the southern boundary next to number one Clitheroe court. The proposed one now sits at approximately 7.2 so in terms of the height it is consistent. 


The window on the southwestern corner of townhouse one mentioned by mr. Wigg has been addressed by a recommended condition for thick obscure glazing or screening in accordance with the res code overlooking standard. 


With respects to the increase to traffic concerns councils traffic and transport department have assessed the traffic generation of the proposed development and I have satisfied the additional movements can be accommodated on Clitheroe court and again it's noted the application will generate significantly less vehicle movements than the existing approval on the subject site producing from approximately 154 a day to 72 a day. It's not considered the proposed development will have increased traffic hazard risk. 


With respects to the neighbourhood character concerns in terms of the development not being sympathetic to building in Albemarle or Clitheroe courts. As discussed in the officers report the proposed development does provide an appropriate transition from the urban character of Toorak Road to the suburban interface of Clitheroe court and Albemarle  court and subject to conditions is highly consistent with the preferred neighbourhood character statement.


It's also the proposed development is consistent with the siting and building height of the existing approval on the subject site and uses a similar contemporary design and materials palette. With respect to the concerns raised by Ms Sinclair from number twelve Albemarle court the front setback of the proposed development to Toorak Road ranges from a minimum six meters up to seven meters. 


This is compliant with respect to res code standard which for a site like this with no directly adjoining sites requires a minimum of six meters. With respect to the setbacks to Albemarle and Clitheroe court the development proposes between two and three meters this is consistent with the siting of the existing approval and is considered to provide an appropriate transition particularly with the two-story transition to number one Clitheroe court and the significant building setback from number two Albemarle court.


With respect to the concerns around the provision of car Parking I again clarify that the proposed development satisfies clause 52069 of the Boroondara planning scheme in respect to the provision of car Parking and the appropriate on-site car Parking is correct relative to the number of bedrooms.


With respect to visitor car Parking the subject sites located within the principle public transport network as such there is no requirement for the provision of visitor car Parking spaces. 


And finally with respect to the increased traffic hazards particularly for children as previously discussed the council's traffic engineers have assessed the car Parking design and layout including the driveways and subjective conditions for the provision of pedestrian sight line triangles for each of the driveways it's not considered that the proposed development will present adverse traffic hazards.


With respect to the removal of Street trees I can confirm that there are no street trees proposed to be removed by this development and with respect to the golden elm tree on number two Albemarle Street conditions have been recommended to increase the southern setback from the property boundary of number two Albemarle Court to five metres for the protection of this tree, also included is a tree management plan to ensure the retention of this tree during construction and of the actual development.


Finally with respect to insufficient garden area being provided to respond through the side streets 46.7% of the site will be maintained as garden area. This significantly exceeds the 35% requirement of the general residential zone and represents an improvement when compared to the highest site coverage of the existing approval. 


Furthermore the proposal includes the planting of 31 canopy trees throughout the site and substantial landscaping throughout each street frontage to respond to the landscape character of Albemarle and Clitheroe court. 


This is considered to be a substantial improvement when compared to the existing development. All of these manners have been discussed in council officers report as well thank you.


Thank you mr Bosley for your response to matters raised. Councillors are there any questions of the officers. Councillor Hollingsworth. Thank You mr. chair I have no questions but I'm ready to foreshadow a motion at the appropriate time. Thank You councillor Hollingsworth.


There appears to be no hands raised for questions so to you Councillor Hollingsworth you foreshadowed a motion. Thank You mr. chair I would like to support the officers recommendation as circulated thank you.


Thank you and councillor Healey seconder. yes mr. chair. Thank You councillor Healey. To assist councillor Hollingsworth is there any opposition this evening, there appears to be none councillor Hollingsworth.


First of all I'd like to thank mr. Bosley for providing such a comprehensive response. I've reviewed the report 120 page in total it is very comprehensive when I look at the existing active application for 20 apartments plus two triple story townhouses I see what's put in front of us here this evening as a substantial and significant improvement. 


Look i knowledge that the objectors have concerns I do sympathise a development of this size or any development at all that is built close to your boundary or abutting your boundary will ensue a significant amount of inconvenience there's no denying that but the frontage of this property is Toorak Road. 


It is a commercial corridor not only is there tram access very close proximity to the east and the west but also there's the Burwood train station and Burwood shopping village it's a location that obviously affords a lot of facility to the prospective occupiers of the properties.


So with my colleagues consent tonight I encourage you to support the application in front of us. I'd only like to just add in closing that I believe this to be an examplar property it has a high degree of articulation the elements the visual contrast the materials used shape form landscape deciduous trees and evergreen trees sensitive interface that's been very carefully considered to abut the neighboring properties. 


The rooftop garden has a high balustrade which is one point seven higher that offers block out to negate any overlooking issues. I also note that Albemarle court has an existing car Park restriction in place that prevents some visitor Parking between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Monday to Friday. I feel council have addressed the concerns to the best ability what's put forward in the report and I will now hand over to councillor Healey thank you.


Any other councillors wishing to speak this evening. There appears to be none councillor Hollingsworth do you wish to add anything further before I put the motion. No thank you mr. chair. Thank you councillor Hollingsworth. 


I'll now put that motion, all those in favour. I'll call your names out councillor Hollingsworth, councillor Ross, councillor Sinfield, Councillor Parke, councillor Watson, councillor Wegman, councillor Addis, councillor Healey, councillor Hurd and myself councillor Thompson I declare that carried unanimously thank you councillors.


I now move on to item 3.2 VCAT decisions and decisions under delegation April 2020. This will be introduced by mr. Simon Mitchell manager of statutory planning. 


Thank you through you mr. chair so this report sets out the planning decisions made under delegation and the VCAT decisions received during April 2020 and the officer recommendation is that the report be received and noted thank you.


Thank you mr. Mitchell. Councillors any questions of officers, there appears to be none. I'm in search of a motion, councillor Watson. As printed chair. Thank you and seconded Cr Ross. Councillor Watson do you wish to speak to this item. 


Yes thank you mr. chair just briefly to commend the officers for the work that they've done on behalf of the community and I commend the report to be supported by my fellow councillors as per the motion printed thank you.


No further councillors seeking to speak on this item so I'll put this motion all those in favour. I'll call your names councillor Ross, Councillor Hollingsworth, councillor Sinfield, Councillor Parke, councillor Wegman, councillor Watson, councillor Addis, councillor Healey, councillor Hurd, and myself councillor Thompson I declare that carried unanimously Thank You councillors.


Move on to item four general business are there any items of general business this evening, there's to be none. Item 5 urgent business are there any items of urgent business, there appears to be none. Item six confidential business, there is none. 


Thank you to the members of the community who viewed the meeting this evening at 23 minutes past 7 I declare the UPSC meeting closed thank you councillors thank you community.