30 The Council, Mr Blumberg, Ms Giles and Mr Timms all expressed concern that the proposed scale, height and siting of the dwellings is not respectful of the existing neighbourhood character. We note that the purposes and objectives of the Residential 1 Zone, clause 55 and the relevant local planning policies[6] all require new residential development to be respectful of the existing neighbourhood character.
31 Mr Bowden described the existing neighbourhood as an established lower density suburb characterised by low scale, single storey bungalow dwellings with pitched roofs. Mr Blumberg emphasised the single storey detached nature of the existing dwellings in the neighbourhood, and pointed out that there are limited examples of double storey dwellings in the neighbourhood. He also pointed out that properties in Malvern Road and Cairnes Crescent have 15 to 20 metre wide frontages with dwellings setback between 9 and 11 metres. Mr Blumberg described these features as "an intact, valued and continuous built form pattern in the neighbourhood".
32 We have inspected the neighbourhood and find that, whilst the majority of dwellings are detached and single storey, there are examples of double storey dwellings. There are also examples of varying lot sizes and shapes due to the existence of some medium density housing such as Mr Kune's double storey dwelling at 42 Forster Avenue and the double storey townhouse style development at 55 Cairnes Crescent. Hence, we find the "built form pattern in the neighbourhood" does include examples of double storey and medium density housing.
33 The gradual inclusion of medium density housing within this neighbourhood is consistent with the objectives and strategies in the State and local planning policy frameworks of the Planning Scheme. The built form pattern of this neighbourhood is not included in any Overlays such as a Heritage Overlay or Neighbourhood Character Overlay, therefore this residential neighbourhood is not recognised in the Planning Scheme as having any special or valued characteristics that need to be protected.
34 The Department of Sustainability and Environment's General Practice Note "Understanding Neighbourhood Character" ('the DSE practice note') states that respecting character does not mean preventing change. It goes on to explain that the neighbourhood character requirements in Planning Schemes are not intended to result in replication of existing building stock or stop change. We see no reason why this site should not contain a good modern example of medium density housing. In fact, the site's abuttal to street frontages on three sides creates, in our opinion, an opportunity to create smaller lots with smaller frontages than surrounding properties without unreasonably impacting upon the neighbourhood character.
35 Mr Biles placed much emphasis upon this proposal being a high quality contemporary or modern architectural design worthy of approval. Mr Manton provided a folio illustrating the quality of dwelling designs prepared by Jan and Manton Pty Ltd. The objectors felt that, whilst the design was modern, it had an industrial feel that was out of character with the neighbourhood. Mr Bowden stated the Council acknowledged the proposal as a good contemporary architectural design, and the Council's issue was not the quality of the design, but the appropriateness of the design response to the existing characteristics of the neighbourhood. In highlighting the inappropriateness of the proposal, the Council and the objectors pointed to the proposed dwellings' small frontage setbacks; the attached housing style; the resultant lack of side setbacks; and the garages sitting forward of dwellings fronting Cairnes Crescent.
36 The DSE practice note states respecting neighbourhood character means a development "should try to 'fit in'" and it explains the two broad approaches to achieve this are respecting the scale and form, or respecting the architectural style, of surrounding development. The features and characteristics of the neighbourhood identified by all parties during the hearing were the scale and form of the neighbourhood, and we have had regard to these.
37 The two and three storey dwellings fronting Malvern Road are attached in two groups, each containing four dwellings. These two groups each extend 25 metres in length along the Malvern Road frontage, separated in the centre between 5.1 metres and 2.4 metres. Dwelling 1 is constructed along the northwest boundary and dwelling 8 is setback between 2.9 and 3.9 metres from Cairnes Crescent.
38 We find that the combination of the two to three storey height; the attached form; and the 6 metre frontage setback creates a large building form in both scale and bulk. In our opinion, this design response creates a visual bulk that is not respectful of the neighbourhood.
39 Mr Biles acknowledged that the proposed built form is different to the existing built form character but argued that this site has always been different and is a "punctuation point" along Malvern Road, between Darling Road and Waverley/Belgrave Roads. Ms Foley likened the design response to the existing institutional buildings on the site because they both extend along the length of the Malvern Road frontage.
40 We find that the existing institutional buildings present as one storey in height to Malvern Road and this height is achieved in part by the fact that the buildings are cut into the site, particularly adjacent to the Malvern Road/Cairnes Crescent corner. In contrast, the proposed dwellings are to be built to coincide with the existing ground level of the Malvern Road frontage and then rise up in height to 3 storeys. This creates a strong built form presence that overwhelms the existing residential streetscape character. In our opinion, if a "punctuation point" is to be achieved on the site, it could just as easily be achieved by a two storey built form with improved separation between individual building forms.
41 The other concern that we have, which is directly related to the attached style of the dwellings, is the proposed private road to be created off Cairnes Crescent. On the northwest side of this road are a row of eight double garages, creating a laneway style appearance. This in itself may have been acceptable; however the southeast side of this road has three dwellings fronting onto it. The frontages of these dwellings comprise a front door entryway width of approximately 2 metres and a double garage door width of 6.4 metres.
42 In total, there are twelve double garages and therefore 24 cars accessing this private road. In amongst this are three dwellings with 2 metre wide entryways, which we find to be poorly sited and located with no sense of address to their 'street frontage'. On a site of this size and shape, we see no reason why such a poor level of amenity and entry/address to three large (four bedroom) dwellings is necessary or appropriate.
43 The proposed double storey dwellings and the garages fronting Cairnes Crescent are all attached, extending from the proposed private road around to the boundary with the SCOPE property. We note that the setback of the second storey of dwelling 11 from the eastern corner of Cairnes Crescent is approximately 4 metres; and the northeast elevation indicates dwellings 11 to 14 all sit between 0.8 and 1.2 metres above the natural ground level.
44 We find that the combination of a two storey built form that sits above the natural ground level; garages with high parapet walls; garages projecting forward of the dwellings; a two storey building close to the Cairnes Crescent street corner; and an attached built form that extends for a length of approximately 86 metres, all result in a dominant built form that is not respectful of the neighbourhood character. In contrast to this, we note that the other north east corner of Cairnes Crescent features a property with a dwelling that has setbacks from each frontage to Cairnes Crescent that makes it appear to have two frontages and this is respectful of the streetscape. Development of this site should seek to achieve a similar outcome.
45 Added to this, we find the provision of private open space for dwelling 11 in its frontage setback on the eastern corner of Cairnes Crescent; and the double storey dwellings surrounding the private open space for dwelling 9 to be poor design responses.
46 We accept the evidence of Mr Vernon regarding the range of existing trees to be retained/relocated on the site as part of this proposal. We feel that the combination of the existing trees, together with new trees and other vegetation will provide an improved landscape character on the site and one that is respectful of and will compliment the neighbourhood character. However, the benefits of the landscape concept do not outweigh the shortfalls that we have already highlighted with this design response.
47 Overall, we are of the opinion that this proposal is not a respectful design response to the existing neighbourhood character, particularly having regard to the proposed siting of the dwellings, their scale and the heavy reliance upon an attached building form. The resultant design creates an unreasonable visual bulk and a poor level of internal amenity for some of the proposed dwellings.