1.14 35-37 & 39 REGENT STREET, MOUNT WAVERLEY …...Jan 31, 2017 · Contemporary architectural form including low pitched roof form, materials and finishes including rendered facades

Council Meeting, 31 January 2017 Section 1.14 – Page 1

35-37 & 39 Regent Street, Mount Waverley – Construction Of A Residential Building And Removal Of Trees And Existing Drainage And Sewerage

1.14 35-37 & 39 REGENT STREET, MOUNT WAVERLEY CONSTRUCTION OF A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING AND REMOVAL OF TREES AND EXISTING DRAINAGE AND SEWERAGE EASEMENT

(TPA/46434)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This application proposes the construction of a three storey residential aged care facility comprising 126 aged care suites.

An appeal has been lodged with Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) against Council’s failure to determine the application within the prescribed time. Council is unable to determine the application but must form a position on the application.

The application was subject to public notification directed by VCAT. One hundred and sixty (160) statements of grounds/submissions opposing the proposal have been received.

Key issues to be considered relate to appropriateness of the use, scale of the proposal, excessive building massing and traffic impact.

This report assesses the proposal against the provisions of the Monash Planning Scheme including the relevant state and local planning policy framework, Clause 55 and issues raised by objectors

The reason for presenting this report to Council is the proposed development cost of $22.3 million.

The proposal is considered inconsistent with the relevant provisions of the Monash Planning Scheme and it is recommended that Council’s position for the VCAT hearing be that the application should not be supported.

RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Peter Panagakos

RESPONSIBLE MANAGER: Angela Hughes

RESPONSIBLE PLANNER: James Heitmann

WARD: Mount Waverley

PROPERTY ADDRESS: 35-37 & 39 Regent Street, Mount Waverley

PRE-APPLICATION MEETING: Yes

STATEMENT OF GROUNDS: 160

ZONING: General Residential Zone – Schedule 2



EXISTING LAND USE: Two detached dwellings

OVERLAY: Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 1

Special Building Overlay – Schedule 1

RELEVANT CLAUSES:

State Planning Policy Framework

Clause 10.01 (Purpose) Clause 10.02 (Goal)

Clause 10.04 (Integrated Decision Making)

Clause 11 (Settlement) Clause 11.04 (Metropolitan Melbourne) Clause 14.02-1 (Catchment Planning and Management) Clause 15 (Built Environment and Heritage) Clause 16 (Housing) Clause 16.01-2 (Location of Residential Development)

Clause 16.01-4 (Housing Diversity)

Local Planning Policy Framework

Clause 21 (Municipal Strategic Statement)

Clause 21.04 (Residential Development)

Clause 21.08 (Transport and Traffic) Clause 22.01 (Residential Development and Character Policy) Clause 22.04 (Stormwater Management Policy) Particular Provisions Clause 52.06 (Car Parking) 52.17 (Native Vegetation) Clause 52.29 (Land Adjacent to a Road Zone, Category 1) ResCode

Clause 55

STATUTORY PROCESSING DATE: 15 October 2016

DEVELOPMENT COST: $22.3 million



LOCALITY PLAN

NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

SUBJECT SITE



RECOMMENDATION:

That Council resolves that if it were in a position to make a decision, it would determine to refuse the application TPA/46434 for the construction of a residential building and removal of trees and existing drainage and sewerage easement at 35-37 & 39 Regent Street, Mount Waverley subject to the following grounds:

1. The proposal is inconsistent with the Residential Development Policy and

Residential Development and Character Policy at Clauses 21.04 and 22.01 of the Monash Planning Scheme.

2. The proposed vegetation removal is inconsistent with Tree Conservation Policy at Clause 22.05 and the decision guidelines of Clause 52.02-4 (Vegetation Protection Overlay).

3. The proposal is inconsistent with the Monash Housing Strategy 2014.

4. The proposal does not adequately satisfy the objectives and design standards of Clause 55 of the Monash Planning Scheme.

5. The proposal is out of character with the existing development in the area

in particular with regard to building mass, bulk and scale.

6. The proposal is considered and overdevelopment of the land. 7. The proposal would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of

surrounding land.

A. B. That Council advise VCAT and all submitters of its position on this application.

BACKGROUND:

The Site and Surrounds The subject land is located on the western side of Regent Street in Mount Waverley, approximately 250 north of its intersection with Waverley Road. The land comprises of two separate Titles and has an overall area of 5,457 square metres. The land is irregular in shape having a 64.01 metre wide frontage to Regent Street (eastern boundary), length of 87.7 metres along the western boundary adjacent to Valley Reserve, depth of 104.1 metres along the northern boundary, and depth of 51.66 metres along the southern boundary. The land has a cross fall of 9.04 metres from north-east to south-west, with Valley Reserve abutting the land along the western boundary. The land is currently developed



with two large dwellings, various outbuildings, two swimming pools and is substantially vegetated including 37 trees of varying significance. The property is located within an established residential area characterised by detached dwellings on large land parcels surrounded by established vegetation and large private open space areas. The housing stock includes an eclectic mix of architectural styles with dwellings constructed from the 1950’s onwards, including some recent replacement of the original houses with new dwellings. An aerial photograph of the subject site and surrounding land can be found attached to this report (Attachment 2).

PROPOSAL:

The application proposes the construction of a three storey residential aged care facility and removal of vegetation. Key details of the proposal can be summarised as follows:

126 aged care beds over three levels including a semi-basement. The proposal provides for various amenities and services including wellness centre, activities room, theatre, lounge area, communal dining rooms, chapel, beauty salon, clinical rooms, outdoor courtyard spaces along with staff administration and operational areas including kitchen, laundry and maintenance facilities.

Contemporary architectural form including low pitched roof form, materials and finishes including rendered facades and colorbond elements in neutral and earthy tones.

Basement and at grade parking areas for 38 vehicles.

Vehicle access via two crossovers to Regent Street.

The main pedestrian access and reception entrance to the development orientated to Regent Street.

Removal of 15 trees and 2 tree groups (comprising clusters of exotic vegetation including palm trees and conifers).

The provision of an electricity sub-station within the street setback. Attachment 1 details plans forming part of the application.

PERMIT TRIGGERS:

Zoning

The subject site is located within a General Residential Zone 2 (GRZ2) under the provisions of the Monash Planning Scheme. Pursuant to the requirements of Clause of this zone 32.08-4 a permit is required to construct a residential building including a Residential Aged Care Facility. No permit is required for use of land as a Residential Aged Care Facility.



Overlays The land is subject to the Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 1 (VPO1). Pursuant to the requirements of Clause 42.02-2 a permit is required to remove or destroy any vegetation that has a trunk circumference greater than 500mm at 1200mm above ground level and is higher than 10 metres. The south-west corner of the site is subject to the Special Building Overlay (SBO). Pursuant to the requirements of Clause 44.05 a permit is required to construct a building or to construct or carry out works. The application is required to be referred to Melbourne Water. Attachment 3 details the zoning and overlays applicable to the subject site and surrounding land. Particular Provisions

Clause 52.17: Native Vegetation

Pursuant to the provisions of Clause 52.17-2 a permit is required to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation. Clause 52.34: Bicycle Facilities

A new use must not commence until the required bicycle facilities and associated signage has been provided on the land. Pursuant to the provisions of Clause 52.34-2 a permit may be granted to reduce or waive the bicycle facilities requirement.

Attachment 3 details the zoning and overlays applicable to the subject site and surrounding land.

CONSULTATION:

Public Notice The application was advertised by the permit applicant as directed by VCAT. Notices were sent to the surrounding property owners and occupants within the surrounding area Regent Street, Oxford Street, Thai Court, Flavia Court, Bond Street, Ophir Road, Wills Avenue and Bruce Street and along with the display of two (2) signs on the site. As an appeal had been lodged with VCAT, statements of grounds (objections) were required to be lodged directly with VCAT. Council was served with 160 copies of the statements of grounds lodged with VCAT. Key issues raised within statements of grounds can be summarised as:

Building scale.

Architectural form.

Loss of vegetation.

Overshadowing.

Overlooking.



Construction impacts.

Car parking and vehicle access.

Impact on Valley Reserve.

Amenity impacts. Council consultation Council independently letter box dropped additional information about the proposal and VCAT proceeding to the same area that was formally notified of the proposal to an extensive area surrounding the site. Public information session As part of the consultation process, Council facilitated two public information sessions on Friday 11 November 2016 (2:00pm to 4:30pm) and Monday 14 November 2016 (5:30pm to 8:30pm). Copies of the plans and application documents were made available to view. Council officers were in attendance to provide additional detail regarding the proposal and VCAT proceeding relating to the application. The information sessions were attended by approximately 100 residents from the surrounding area. Attachment 4 details the location of objector properties. Referrals

Melbourne Water The application was referred to Melbourne Water in accordance with the requirement of Clause 44.04-5. Melbourne Water has no objections. Public Transport Victoria The application was referred to Public Transport Victoria in accordance with the requirement of Clause 52.36-1. Public Transport Victoria has no objection to the proposal. Internal Referral The application has been referred to Council’s Traffic and Drainage Engineers for comment. Relevant comments have been used as part of the assessment of the application. In preparing this report, advice was also sought from Council’s Horticulture Unit regarding the impact of this proposal on Valley Reserve in terms of bushfire management of the reserve, if a planning permit is granted for this development.

DISCUSSION:

Aged Care Use Census data identifies that the City of Monash has an ageing population, with 28 per cent of the total population being over 55 years of age. Available census



data indicated that the population of Monash is predominantly of an older bracket and is increasing in age. The Department of Health and Ageing has identified the eastern metropolitan region of Melbourne as an area which requires additional aged care beds to meet the national standard of aged care places. The City of Monash Council Action Plan 2009-2013 and Positive Ageing Action Plan 2011-2014 identify the need to provide for additional aged care facilities and accommodation types in appropriate locations. Objectives of the Victorian Government Residential Aged Care Policy 2009 recognise:

“Residential aged care facilities should be appropriately located close to community amenities and where there is good access to public transport for visitors and staff. The State’s planning system has a role in facilitating the development of residential aged care facilities...”

Whilst the provision of additional aged care accommodation has sound strategic policy justification, the location and form of any such development needs to respond to applicable housing policy provisions. Monash Housing Strategy 2014 The Monash Housing Strategy was developed to review Council’s current housing strategies based on an assessment of key State and Local Strategies and research from all tiers of Government and other research bodies. The housing strategy highlights the municipality’s ageing population and a growth in residents aged between 70 to 84 years of age. The housing strategy identifies that facilitating housing diversity, provision of specialised accommodation and services for older residents and providing appropriate housing for an ageing population will be key issues for Monash within the foreseeable future. The need for the City of Monash to adopt a proactive role to address housing issues has been imperative and the Monash Housing Strategy forms part of that role. Opportunities for residential growth within the City of Monash are increasingly limited within established residential areas. The subject land is located within a “Creek Environs” precinct where policy objectives envisage lower scale development and an open landscaped character. Residential development outcomes seek conventional lower density detached housing and unit development with larger setbacks to boundaries adjacent to Valley Reserve. The submitted proposal is at odds with the objectives and guidance of this strategy. The subject land and surrounding area has not been identified for increased residential density and development of the scale proposed. The design



response has little regard for the surrounding context in terms of built form outcomes, deign objectives of the housing strategy and neighbourhood character. The Housing Strategy envisages development of a much lesser scale adjacent to Valley Reserve typically in the form of detached dwellings surrounded by large secluded private open space areas, retention of existing significant vegetation and substantial development setback from the adjacent public open space areas. The three storey attached form of the proposed development will be visually dominant on the neighbourhood and landscape character and result in a visually imposing impact on the adjacent public open space area. State and Local Planning Policy Framework Plan Melbourne is the Metropolitan Strategy that planning authorities must consider when assessing applications for planning permits. Plan Melbourne recognises an aging population trend and the need to provide for age appropriate housing and different types of accommodation over a lifetime. Development should be appropriately located and minimise its impact on residential amenity of established residential areas. Development of the scale proposed is considered to be more appropriate to an activity centre or land adjoining a commercial precinct with less sensitive interfaces and fewer site constraints. Clause 15.01 Built Environment and Heritage

The objective of Clause 15.01-1 is: “To create urban environments that are safe, functional and provide good quality environments with a sense of place and cultural identity.”

This Clause requires that development achieves architectural and urban design outcomes that contribute positively to a local urban character and enhance the public realm and minimise detrimental impacts on neighbouring properties. Recognition should be given to the setting in which buildings are designed and the integrating role of landscape architecture.

Relevant strategies seek to:

“Promote good urban design to make the environment more liveable and attractive.

Ensure new development or redevelopment contributes to community and cultural life by improving safety, diversity and choice, the quality of living and working environments, accessibility and inclusiveness and environmental sustainability.

Require development to respond to its context in terms of urban character, cultural heritage, natural features, surrounding landscape and climate.”

The proposed development has little regard to the surrounding context including Valley Reserve to the west and established residential areas along Regent Street. Whilst the established form of the surrounding area is typified by large dwellings,



the majority of dwellings on the western side of Regent Street are located on large land parcels in excess of 2000 square metres, with relatively modest building footprints of between 12% to 25% of site area and generous building setbacks to Regent Street and Valley Reserve. Any redevelopment of the site needs to better respond to the densely landscaped context of the area with a built form that sits comfortably amongst the natural environment and the surrounding streetscape. Housing policy at Clause 16.01 of the State Planning Policy Framework seeks to:

“Increase the supply of housing in existing urban areas by facilitating increased housing yield in appropriate locations, including under-utilised urban land.”

“To facilitate the timely development of residential aged care facilities to meet existing and future needs.”

“Encourage planning for housing that: - Delivers an adequate supply of land or redevelopment opportunities for

residential aged care facilities. - Enables older people to live in appropriate housing in their local

community.” Increased residential density and dwelling diversity is sought by state and local policies in appropriate locations. Whilst the proposed development satisfies housing diversity and provision of additional aged care facilities objectives, the design and scale of the proposal fails to appropriately respond to the surrounding context and applicable policy guidance which envisages development of a much more modest scale. The Municipal Strategic Statement at Clause 21 identifies the Garden City Character of the municipality as a core value held by the community and Council as a significant and important consideration in all land use and development decisions. At Clause 21.04 (Residential Development Policy) Council's goal is for residential development in the City to be balanced in providing a variety of housing styles whilst remaining sympathetic to existing neighbourhood character. The Residential Development and Character Policy at Clause 22.01 seeks to ensure that new development is successfully integrated into existing residential environments, with minimal streetscape or amenity impact, and designed to achieve outcomes that enhance the Garden City Character of the area. The submitted proposal is inconsistent with this policy guidance which seeks a more modest design response. Neighbourhood Character & Design Detail At Clause 21.04 (Residential Development Policy) Council's goal is for residential development in the City to be balanced in providing a variety of housing styles whilst remaining sympathetic to existing neighbourhood character.



The Residential Development and Character Policy at Clause 22.01 seeks to ensure that new development is successfully integrated into existing residential environments, with minimal streetscape or amenity impact, and designed to achieve outcomes that enhance the Garden City Character of the area. The design response must be appropriate to the neighbourhood and the site, and must respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site. The height and setback of buildings must also respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limit the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings. The proposed three storey form is inconsistent with the vision of the desired future character statement and Monash Housing Strategy. Any development of the subject land needs to suitably integrate with the established and emerging built form of the surrounds. The large land area of the subject property does not merely justify a built form outcome of the scale proposed. Given the surrounding residential hinterland interface and commercial nature of an aged care facility, any design response and intensity of land use should be of a more modest scale which comfortably integrates with the innocuous residential nature of surrounding development. The form of development needs to have careful consideration of interface with existing adjoining properties and how the development fits within the neighbourhood and landscape character of Valley Reserve immediately adjacent to the west. The surrounding development comprises predominantly detached dwellings, interspersed with less intensive medium density housing developments providing for substantial building and landscaping setbacks. Newer development is generally sympathetic to the older housing stock. The three storey scale, commercial architectural styling and form of the proposal is at odds with the surrounding built form and considered inappropriate within an established residential hinterland locality. The three storey and continuous massing of the proposal is at odds with the character of the surrounds which comprises of mostly detached single and double storey dwellings, unassuming and modest building footprints, vast secluded private open space areas, substantial setbacks to the street and Valley Reserve, and retention of existing established trees. The design of the proposal poorly integrates with the built form in the surrounding area with regard to both streetscape and rear yard character. The architectural styling of the proposal is not in keeping with the established built form and neighborhood. The proposed development is visually dominant in its scale and the architectural form is at odds with of dwellings within the surrounding area. It is considered that a more appropriate design response for the site would better integrate new residential development having regard to the existing and preferred character of the area. Development of the land should be less visually dominant, more modest in scale and massing, be subservient to the landscape



and provide for appropriate interface to Valley Reserve and adjoining properties. Architectural styling and design detail should be more reflective and sympathetic of the predominant character and form of the surrounding area. The encroachment of at grade car parking areas, vehicle accessways, building basement and electricity sub-station into the street setback area is considered unacceptable and inconsistent with residential policy which seeks landscaped street setback areas with minimal built form encroachments. Built form and scale The size and scale of the proposal is an inappropriate design response having regard to the surrounding streetscape which comprises more modest suburban forms. Whilst the façade detailing provides for reasonable visual interest, the overall massing of the development is excessive when viewed from the street, adjoining properties and Valley Reserve. The overall massing and visual impact of the development is particularly dominant in presentation to Valley Reserve. The significant natural fall of the land towards Valley Reserve results in a 3-4 storey building scale when viewed from the west. Built form outcomes to a scale of the proposal are substantially greater than the established form of the surrounding area and that envisaged by applicable policy. Whilst the design response provides for reasonable facade articulation and height graduation, the overall massing impact is unacceptable given the surrounding context. The design response needs to more appropriately integrate with the established residential area. The scale and form of the development should be more akin to townhouse development providing for clear upper level separation, building mass, spacing and proportion commensurate with the established built form of surrounding development, being detached dwellings. Car Parking, traffic and access The design response provides for 18 car spaces within the basement, 1 pick-up/drop off car space adjacent to the main entrance and 19 car spaces within an at-grade car parking area located to the north-east corner of the land. The table below details the provision of car parking proposed within the context of the requirements of Clause 52.06-3:

Number of lodging rooms

Clause 52.06 car parking requirement

Number of car parking spaces

required

Number of car spaces proposed

Residential Aged Care

126 0.3 car spaces to each lodging room

37 car spaces 38 car spaces

TOTAL Required

37 car spaces

TOTAL Proposed

38 car spaces



The traffic report submitted within the application indicates that turning movement counts were undertaken on Wednesday 3 February 2016 from 6:00pm-9.30am and 3:00pm-6.30pm. These counts indicate that the AM peak hour (8-9am) is the busiest period with 423 vehicle movements. The report estimates that Regent Street carries in the order of 3,700 vehicles/day. Council’s most recent 7-day count for Regent Street north of Waverley Road was undertaken from 5 to 11 December 2015 and indicated an average weekday volume of 3121 vehicles/day. The average 85th percentile speed was 47km/h. The traffic report indicates that based on surveys of other aged care facilities, traffic generation rates of 3 vehicle trips/bed (daily) and 0.2 vehicle trips/bed (commuter peak) would be adopted which are considered reasonable. This results in an estimated development traffic generation of around 25 vehicles/peak hour and 378 vehicles/day. A traffic modelling computer analysis of the Waverley Road/Regent Street intersection indicated that with the addition of the expected development traffic, the intersection would continue to operate under very good conditions during the morning peak and excellent conditions during the afternoon peak. Whilst the development will result in increased traffic to the existing traffic network, traffic generated by the development is within the capacity of the surrounding road network. However, access to the building from the basement parking area is awkward and inconvenient and unlikely to be utilised by visitors who would be expected to generate the main demand for this space. The waste collection is proposed to be undertaken by a private contractor, with collection via the southern car park in a dedicated service access dock. The Waste Management Plan does not indicate the proposed size of the waste vehicle. A swept path analysis is required to determine the appropriateness of the design of the basement to accommodate onsite waste detection. Bicycle Parking

Bicycle parking is required to be provided in accordance with the requirement specified by Clause 52.34-3 of the Monash Planning Scheme. The table below details the number of bicycle parking spaces required:

Use No. of beds Clause 52.34-3 Requirement

Bike parking requirement generated

Nursing home 126 1 to each 7 beds (employee)

1 to each 60 beds

(visitor)

18

2

TOTAL REQUIRED 20 bike spaces

TOTAL PROVIDED 26 bike spaces



Bicycle parking is provided for within the basement including the required end of trip amenities, like showers. Vegetation Removal The part of the land to be developed is substantially vegetated and includes 50 existing trees within proximity of the proposed works. The application proposes the removal of 31 existing trees and 3 tree groups (clusters of trees) on the subject. The extent of vegetation removal includes 14 trees of moderate retention value, 17 trees of low retention value and four tree groups (Palm trees, Conifers and Pittosporum). Five existing trees are proposed to be retained including 2 trees of high retention value and, 1 tree of moderate retention value and 2 trees of low retention value. Removal of 15 trees and 2 tree groups (comprising clusters of exotic palms and conifers) would be subject to the provisions of the Vegetation Protection Overlay. The extent of vegetation removal is considered excessive given the natural and treed environs of the surrounding area, including Valley Reserve. Existing vegetation makes a substantial contribution to the landscape character and surrounding environs and the proposed extent of vegetation removal is contrary to policy which seeks to maximise tree retention and inclusion in new development, retain an open landscaped character, provision of substantial landscaped setbacks in any new development. Any redevelopment of the land should provide for greater inclusion and retention of significant vegetation on the land. The extent of vegetation removal is a further indication of the excessive overall scale of the proposal. The retention of existing significant vegetation would result in more substantial building breaks, increased development setback from the adjoining residential boundaries and preserving a soft landscaped edge to the development. Flooding and Stormwater Any development on the land will need to be designed to provide for on-site detention of stormwater and minimise stormwater overflow impacts on surrounding properties. Council’s drainage engineers have identified that a new stormwater drain, creation of new easements and stormwater detention system would be required in the event of any approval being granted. Melbourne Water has reviewed the submitted application and has no objection to the proposal. Construction Impacts A construction management plan including details of staging of the construction works and construction vehicle access traffic management plan should be requirement of any permit issued. A construction management plan to minimise amenity and construction impact of the proposed development on the surrounding area. Any construction management issues can be addressed as part of the construction management plan should a permit be approved.



The extent of excavation and any required stabilisation measures will be considered by the appointed Building Surveyor as part of the Building Permit process.

Overlooking

Habitable room windows and balcony spaces should be located and designed to avoid direct views into the secluded private open space and habitable room windows of adjoining dwellings. Overlooking issues are made somewhat worse as a consequence of the fall across the site and level differences with the adjoining properties. The finished floor levels of the proposed development sit higher than existing natural ground level and adjacent properties to the south and west. Additional screening measures/plan detail is required to deal with overlooking issues along the northern and southern boundary to satisfy overlooking requirements. A substantial proportion of upper level north and south facing windows are screened (or require screening) to prevent overlooking resulting in limited outlook and poor internal amenity for future residents. The extent of screening to upper level terraced areas further exacerbates the massing impact on the adjoining properties and compromises the amenity of these spaces. It also demonstrates a poor response to the context of the immediately adjoining properties. Overshadowing Overshadowing requirements seek to ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space. The proposed development results in some increased overshadowing to the property abutting the southern boundary in the afternoon. It is also noteworthy that the proposed development will have an overshadowing impact on the Valley Reserve shard path during morning hours. Surrounding Residential Amenity Conditions relating to general amenity, noise impacts, odour emissions and the requirement to comply with relevant EPA requirements can be placed on any permit that is to issue. Additional requirements can be placed on any permit issued relating to delivery times and waste collection to protect residential amenity of adjoining residential areas. Bushfire Management of Valley Reserve A number of objectors have raised concern that vegetation within Valley Reserve will be required to be removed as a result of the proposal to ensure the appropriate fire rating is achieved.

The site is within a Bushfire Prone Area (BPA) recognised under the Building Code of Australia (BCA). The site is not contained within a Bushfire Management



Overlay (BMO) of the Monash Planning Scheme. The BPA requires a 12.5 BAL (Bushfire Attack Level) to be achieved in all areas identified as Bushfire Prone and is a low rating. The BAL is bushfire intensity levels that a home may experience during a bushfire. Compliance with this requirement can be provided in a number of ways including through materials used in the construction of a proposed building coupled with the setback to the vegetation along with the management of the vegetation within the Reserve.

Advice from Council’s Manager Horticulture Services is that the Reserve is currently managed in such a way that it should not have an impact on existing adjoining properties in case of fire. Given this would be a new construction, it is Council’s preference is that the required BAL rating be achieved wholly on the development site through the appropriate design of the building with no need for loss of vegetation within the Reserve or need to provide a fire break. Should the proposal be supported, a report by a qualified Bushfire Management expert would be required to demonstrate this be achieved.

CONCLUSION:

Whilst the proposal would satisfy the broad objective of increased density and housing diversity objectives of the Monash Planning Scheme, it is considered it does so at the expense of the competing character policy within the Scheme of neighbourhood character. The design response displays inadequate regard for the surrounding context having insufficient consideration of the sensitive Valley Reserve environs, neighbourhood character, established and emerging built form, building height and scale, height transition, design detail, street setback, landscaping, and future amenity outcomes for residents. A more substantial land size is not mere justification for development of increased density and scale. The proposal is excessive in its built form given the locality, does not demonstrate site responsive design and constitutes an overdevelopment of the subject land. It is recommended that the application be refused.



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

Documents

1.14 35-37 & 39 REGENT STREET, MOUNT WAVERLEY …...Jan 31, 2017 · Contemporary architectural form including low pitched roof form, materials and finishes including rendered facades