RESPONDENT TO P2478/2008 & APPLICANT FOR REVIEW P2916/2008

Defenders of the South East Green Wedge Inc v Kingston CC [2009] VCAT 526

1. Pursuant to section 127 and clause 64 of Schedule 1 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 the permit application is amended in Application for Review P2916/2008 by changing the name of the permit applicant to:

1. Pursuant to section 127 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 the application is amended by changing the name of the applicant for review in P2478/2008 to:

1. Leave is given to the permit applicant to substitute for the permit application plans, the following plans filed with the Tribunal:

TP00 Rev A dated 16.02.07, TP00a Rev A dated 16.02.07, TP01 Rev F dated 16.12.08, TP01b Rev C dated 02.12.08, TP02 Rev D dated 19.09.08, TP03 Rev C dated 16.02.07and TP04 Rev C dated 16.02.07

1. The decision of the Responsible Authority is varied.
2. In permit application KP173/07 a permit is granted and directed to be issued for the land at 810-834 Springvale Road, Braeside in accordance with the endorsed plans and the conditions set out in Appendix A. The permit allows:
   • Use and development of part of the land as a vehicle store (bus depot);
   • Alterations and additions to existing buildings and works;
   • Removal of native vegetation; and
   • Alterations to existing access and creation of new access to Springvale Road.

For Applicant for Review P2916/2008 & Respondent to P2478/2008 (the permit applicant)

• Mr R Burton, acoustic engineer of Burton Acoustic Group;
• Mr A Organ, ecologist of Ecology Partners;
• Mr P Haack, landscape architect of urbis; and
• Mr J Govenlock, town planner of urbis.

The evidence of Mr W de Waard, traffic engineer of Traffix Group was accepted without cross-examination.

For Applicant for Review P2478/2008 & Respondent to P2916/2008

Ms J Lardner of counsel instructed by Environment Defenders Office

Construct buildings and works for use as a vehicle store (bus depot)

Section 82 Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Application for Review P2478/2008)

Section 80 Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Application for Review P2916/2008)

Use the land as a vehicle store in GWZ3 (cl.35.04-1)

Construct buildings and carry out works associated with the vehicle store and alterations and additions to existing buildings and works in GWZ3 (cl. 35.04-5)

Alter and create new access to Springvale Road, a Road Zone 1 (cl. 52.29)

40.71 hectare allotment containing a retail plant nursery in two main buildings with car parking fronting Springvale Road and smaller buildings, car parking, storage and stockpiling of materials and existing vegetation towards the rear.

1. Planning permission is sought to develop and use the land generally located to the rear of "Gardenworld" at 810-834 Springvale Road Braeside as a Grenda bus depot. The planning application was approved under delegation, but the Council subsequently passed a resolution to oppose the proposal at this hearing of the applications for review on the basis it was contrary to its Green Wedge zoning and relevant planning policies.
2. This matter involves two applications for review:
   • The first is an application by the Defenders of the South East Green Wedge Incorporated to review Kingston City Council's decision to grant a permit (Application for Review P2478/2008); and
   • The second is an application by the permit applicant to review conditions 1(c), 1(d), 1(g), 3, 5 (a-l) and 18(c) contained in the Council's Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit (Application for Review P2916/2008).

1. At the start of the hearing, submissions were made concerning amending the names of parties to these proceedings and amending the plans to be relied upon (which had been circulated in accordance with the Tribunal's practice note requirements). I granted leave for these amendments.
2. Mr Noy attended the start of the hearing only and tabled comments on the conditions sought by VicRoads on behalf of the Department of Transport (that is not a party to this proceeding).
3. Of the conditions to be reviewed, Mr Soding advised the Council agrees there is a typographical error in condition 1(g), and suggested conditions 1(c) and 18(c) may fall away because of the amended plans.

1. The review site contains a retail plant nursery, Gardenworld, in two main buildings fronting Springvale Road. There are additional buildings, including sheds, temporary buildings and houses located to the rear amongst gravel and grassed areas that contain a few scattered mature trees. The front of the site contains sealed and unsealed car parking and access roads.
2. Surrounding the site are a mix of land uses and buildings:
   • To the west are the Mentone Grammar School sports fields and Braeside Park (312 hectares of significant parkland). Further west and northwest is the Southern Golf Club;
   • To the north is a Croatian catholic church building with extensive car parking at the rear;
   • To the east is Springvale Road and further east is a residential estate known as 'The Keys'; and
   • To the south is vacant land followed by JV Marine, which contains large buildings and open areas displaying boats and associated marine equipment.

1. It is proposed to develop and use the rear of the review site (about 15,670 square metres) for the purpose of a vehicle store (bus depot).
2. The bus depot will comprise:
   • Access by buses along a 7.5 metre wide accessway at the northern end of the site utilising a modified crossover to Springvale Road;
   • Centrally located parking for 60 buses with an access road circling the parking bays;
   • Refueling facilities adjacent to the east side of the bus depot land;
   • A 6 metre high building with a floor area of 761 square metres containing a maintenance workshop (280 square metres) and operational facilities (481 square metres); and
   • An employee car parking area for 90 cars at the southern end of bus depot land, accessed via an access road adjacent to the southern boundary of the site.
3. In order to facilitate this development, modifications are also required to the balance of the site and Gardenworld, including:
   • Removal of the southern end of the 'collectors corner' building and a new extension on the west (rear) side of this building;
   • A new rear car parking area for 40 cars for staff and visitors to Gardenworld;
   • Relocation of the 'lotus water gardens and ponds' to the area between the two main buildings;
   • A new toilet facility also between the two main buildings;
   • Modified loading facilities at the rear of the 'Gardenworld' building;
   • A new one way (southbound) access road at the rear of the two main buildings and new rear car parking area;
   • Modified car parking and access arrangements in the frontage of the site to service Gardenworld and its visitors and Grenda buses and its staff; and
   • Modified access arrangements to Springvale Road.

1. The review site is contained within a Green Wedge Zone Schedule 3 under the Kingston Planning Scheme ('the Planning Scheme'); and is located outside the urban growth boundary.
2. The Green Wedge provisions at clause 57 apply, albeit there is no actual permit requirement under these provisions. The purpose of this clause includes:
   • To protect metropolitan green wedge land from uses and development that would diminish its agricultural, environmental, conservation, landscape natural resource or recreation values.
   • To encourage the location of urban activities in urban areas.
3. Planning permission is required to use land as a vehicle store (bus depot); to construct a building or construct or carry out works for this land use; and to alter and add to the existing buildings and works on the land.
4. The immediately surrounding land comprises a mix of zonings:
   • The land to the north and south is zoned Green Wedge Schedule 3;
   • The land to the east is contained in a Road Zone Category 1 (Springvale Road) with a Residential 1 Zone beyond; and
   • The land to the west is zoned Public Park and Recreation (Braeside Park) and Special Use Zone Schedule 1 (Mentone Grammar School sports fields).
5. There are no overlay controls affecting this site.
6. All parties referred to the relevant policies contained in the State and local planning policy frameworks of the Planning Scheme. I do not intend to repeat these policies verbatim in this decision. Where relevant, I will refer to aspects of the policies as they pertain to the issues in dispute in this case.

1. A vehicle store (bus depot) is a land use for which discretion exists to grant a planning permit in the Green Wedge Zone - that is the starting point. In determining whether this land use should be given planning permission, it is necessary to consider the planning policy framework and the context of the review site and surrounds. Mr Soding and Ms Lardner both submitted a key issue is whether a bus depot is an "urban related use", which is the term used in the local planning policy framework of the Planning Scheme to describe the type of uses that may be appropriate in this area, including on this site.

1. The Municipal Profile in the Municipal Strategic Statement ('the MSS') explains Kingston's non-urban areas are part of a south-east regional wedge of non urban land that extends across the municipalities of Greater Dandenong, Frankston, Casey and Kingston[1]. The overview of non urban land in the MSS states, in part:

Kingston's non urban land fulfils a range of rural and 'urban related' roles, including agricultural production, sand extraction, land filling, regional open space, protection of Moorabbin Airport's flight paths, nature conservation, and a location for urban related uses including churches, sporting facilities, institutional uses, etc.

The non urban areas comprise a largely rural landscape character, and although some areas have developed a semi-urban appearance the re-creation of pre-settlement landscapes remains an important objective in Kingston's non urban areas. The area also plays an important role in providing recreational opportunities for the south east metropolitan area. The future transformation of the non urban area into a carefully managed network of parks will bestow community benefits of the highest order, following years of blight brought about by the negative impacts of sand extraction and land filling.[2]

1. One of the key land use challenges identified in the MSS is the non urban interface:

Land on the urban fringe often exists as a 'zone of impermanence' where the use of land is in a state of transition from non-urban to urban uses. This pattern creates uncertainty and instability for land owners and the community alike, and can frequently result in urban blight along the urban/non urban interface. The creation of a 'hard' edge will be an important planning outcome of future structure planning in Kingston's non urban areas. Such edges must be clear, stable and capable of enduring development pressure.[3]

1. The Strategic Land Use Framework Plan in clause 21.04 of the MSS is silent on future land uses for the land along the west side of Springvale Road, between Lower Dandenong and Governor Roads, which includes this site. Clause 21.10 in the MSS specifically relates to non-urban areas and acknowledges these areas are under pressure for more intensive urban development due in part to their proximity to established urban areas, the availability of physical infrastructure and the decline in agricultural production. The overview states it is important land use outcomes are resolved through structure planning and seeking to achieve sustainable use and development outcomes; and:

The creation of a 'hard' edge between the urban and non urban areas will be an important planning outcome of the structure planning process, and will assist in the management of development pressures at the urban/non urban interface.

1. Mr Soding and Ms Lardner argued the 'hard edge' is Springvale Road rather than the non-urban land on the west side of Springvale Road, but I disagree because the hard edge is an identified key "land use" challenge, as explained in paragraph 19 above. This leads to the question of what are the land use opportunities for the west side of Springvale Road between Lower Dandenong and Governor Roads in the policy framework? This land is not contained in the Sandbelt Open Space Pr[4]ject Policy4; therefore it is not intended to form part of the 'Chain of [5]arks'5. However, it is contained in the South East Non Urban[6]Area Policy6 that includes objectives to manage the edge of urban areas and ensure use and development does not compromise metropolitan urban growth strategies. Its policy on preferred uses states:

Non urban land be protected for non urban purposes and used for activities which are consistent with the function and character of the non urban area. The following uses are supported within the non urban area:

• Agriculture, horticulture, extractive industries, land fill operations.
• Creation and enhancement of environmental features, including wetland systems.
• Public open space facilities including parks, sports fields, bicycle networks, etc.
• Public utilities and major infrastructure facilities such as retarding basins and effluent treatment works.
• Low density institutional uses eg: schools, clubs, churches.

1. The policy contains a Keysborough/Wetlands Framework Plan (Policy Map 2) that specifically relates to the area including and surrounding the review site. The policy states "the use and development of land be in accordance with" this plan, which nominates the west side of Springvale Road between Lower Dandenong and Governor Roads as "urban related" and describes Springvale Road as:
   • Some further opportunities for the establishment of low density 'urban related' uses. Siting and design of new buildings to maximise east-west views, be of a low profile and provide sufficient setbacks to reduce visual impact.
   • Improve landscaping on public and private land [sic] signage, display of goods, car parking, etc should be sited and designed to contribute to the 'rural gateway' function.
2. The policy then goes on to talk about "Planning Opportunities" including:
   • Land extensive urban related uses, and low density institutional and recreational uses may be considered on land flanking Springvale Road between Lower Dandenong Road and Governor Road, but only where a positive contribution is made to the landscape and visual quality of this corridor and high standards of urban design are achieved.
   • All proposals for urban related be assessed against the relevant objectives and criteria contained within the Keysborough Non Urban Area Guidelines.
3. None of the parties or expert witnesses, including the Council, were able to provide a copy of these Guidelines hence they did not form part of the submissions or evidence presented during the hearing; and they do not form part of my reasons for this decision.
4. So, returning to the question of land use opportunities for this site, the planning policy framework:
   • Supports low density institutional uses eg: schools, clubs, churches;
   • Acknowledges there are some opportunities for the establishment of low density 'urban related' uses; and
   • Provides for consideration of land extensive urban related uses, and low density institutional and recreational uses (subject to specific design outcomes that I will deal with later).
5. The distinction between urban and urban related uses appears to be largely artificial. Each of the uses or types of uses listed above are just as likely to be found in urban areas as they are in this Green Wedge zone. This list is also not all inclusive and does not prevent other discretionary uses, such as a bus depot, from being considered. The policies and their reference documents (that provide background information on the policies) do not, and cannot, prohibit all other discretionary and 'as-of-right' uses. Each proposal must be considered on its merits, and this consideration must include the context of the site and surrounds as well as the detail of the proposal.

1. In considering the context of the site and surrounds, I have looked at, firstly, the zoning and, secondly, the land use and built form.

1. The properties fronting the west side of Springvale Road between Lower Dandenong and Governor Roads are either zoned Green Wedge or Special Use, with the land behind (further west) zoned Public Park and Recreation or Public Conservation and Resource.
2. The urban growth boundary runs down part of Springvale Road so that approximately two thirds of the properties along the east side of Springvale Road are zoned Mixed Use, Farming and Residential with the southern third (approximately) zoned Green Wedge.
3. Given the mixed zoning of the immediately surrounding area, this site is not located within, what I would describe as, a pristine green wedge area.

1. Ms Lardner submitted the land uses on the east side of Springvale Road are not relevant when considering the proposal in the policy context of 'urban related uses' as they are located within the urban growth boundary and zoned for urban development. This is not entirely correct as the lower third (approximately) of the eastern side is zoned Green Wedge and outside of the urban growth boundary. This area is used as the Keysborough Golf Course and includes a golf driving range and an asian restaurant along its Springvale Road frontage.
2. On the west side of Springvale Road, heading north from Governor Road, there is:
   • A petrol station and convenience shop and a separate Nandos food and drink premises at the corner of Springvale and Governor Roads;
   • A soccer club with sports fields and clubrooms;
   • A church with a large car parking area at the rear;
   • What appears to be a private residential property;
   • JV Marine that contains open areas and large buildings displaying boats and other associated marine equipment for sale;
   • A parcel of vacant land;
   • The review site containing Gardenworld;
   • The Australian Croatian Club;
   • The Freccia Azzurra Club (an Italian social club);
   • Pots Galore displaying pots and other garden products for sale;
   • Mentone Grammar School sports fields;
   • What appears to be a couple of private residential properties; and
   • The Southern Golf Club.
3. This is the existing land use function and built form character of this non-urban area. I am of the opinion these land uses are all generally "urban" and "urban related" as they could be located in an urban area. The majority of them are land uses that benefit from large areas of land as, to use the terminology in the policy framework, they are land extensive.
4. I agree with Mr Pitt that a bus depot is a similar type of land use. The parking of buses necessitates a large parcel of land capable of accommodating parked buses; access roads with large turning circles for the buses; ancillary maintenance and refuelling facilities; and car parking for bus drivers and associated staff. In my opinion, a bus parking facility could be found in an urban or non urban area, hence it is both "urban" and "urban related". As such, I find the proposed land use is in accordance with the 'urban related' theme contained in the planning policy framework.[7]

1. The South East Non Urban Area Policy states it is policy that all proposals:
   • Protect and create a high quality rural landscape.
   • Protect and create flora and fauna habitats and networks.
   • Create public open spaces and open space linkages.
   • Result in clear and sustainable urban boundaries.
   • Result in an urban form which is of a high design standard and low visual impact.[8]
2. Similar policies are made in the Keysborough/Wetlands Framework Plan section of the policy and, under Planning Opportunities, land extensive urban related uses may be considered:

... only where a positive contribution is made to the landscape and visual quality of this corridor and high standards of urban design are achieved.[9]

1. Ms Lardner submitted Gardenworld currently provides an informal area to the rear of the site that creates a buffer to Braeside Park and this proposal transforms it into an area of extensive hardstand with a very utilitarian building form. She also submitted it offers next to no opportunity to realise the objectives in the Planning Scheme about environmental, ecological, scenic and landscape values, nor does it create open space links and opportunities for recreation.
2. Having regard to the purpose of the Green Wedge Zone and the local planning policy objectives for non urban land, I agree with the submissions of Mr Pitt that:
   • The review site does not have agricultural, environmental, historic, landscape, recreational or tourist opportunities, nor does it contain mineral or stone resources; and
   • The review site is not appropriate for sustainable farming activities, nor does it, or could it, contribute to the creation of open, rural and scenic non urban landscapes.

1. Because of the size of the review site, planning permission is required to remove a small patch (334 square metres) of Heathy Woodland and 12 of the 14 scattered trees generally located in the rear northwest corner of the site. Mr Organ gave evidence the site is quite modified, but the trees have some ecological value. However, the ecological vegetation class has a conservation status of 'least concern' in the Gippsland Plain Bioregion. Under the Native Vegetation Framework, avoiding and minimising vegetation loss is difficult due to the land extensive nature of the proposed bus depot. Losses may be permitted subject to appropriate offsets. Mr Organ stated the provision of long term offsets in Braeside Park would be an overall better ecological outcome. I accept this evidence and find it is appropriate to allow the proposed removal of the existing vegetation to facilitate the creation of the bus parking areas and access roads subject to the creation of a suitable offset.

1. The area of land to be used as the bus depot is at the rear of Gardenworld and will be largely invisible from Springvale Road. I do not agree with Ms Lardner's suggestion there is a view corridor from Springvale Road through the middle of this site to Braeside Park that needs to be protected. Rather, this site, like many others along the west side of Springvale Road, forms part of the rear boundary to Braeside Park. In my opinion, this is the only sensitive interface that needs to be considered in light of the policies mentioned above in paragraphs 35 and 36. It is land zoned Public Park and Recreation and it forms part of the 'Chain of Parks'.
2. The Mentone Grammar School sports fields and the current rear boundary of the review site generally have a vegetated edge to Braeside Park. I am of the opinion a similar outcome needs to be achieved as part of this development to ensure, from the outset and in long term, that the landscape and visual quality of Braeside Park is maintained and the bus depot has a low visual impact.
3. No landscape plan or landscape concept was submitted with the application or the amended plans. The amended plans contain a 3.5 metre wide setback along the majority of the rear boundary and the submissions and evidence presented indicated this area would contain landscaping, a drainage easement and a colorbond fence. The purpose of the colorbond fence is to provide an immediate visual barrier (as well as an acoustic barrier) between Braeside Park and the bus depot, but Mr Haack was unsure where exactly this fence would be located[10]. I am of the opinion it should be setback 3.5 metres, so that it is adjacent to the access road for the buses and the staff car park[11] with a post and wire fence constructed along the property boundary with Braeside Park. There is a larger area available for landscaping at the rear of the proposed maintenance building, and I am of the opinion the colorbond fence should be setback further from the rear boundary to enable a larger landscaped buffer as well as providing a gate to ensure the landscaped rear boundary can be accessed and maintained. A larger landscaped area will contribute to the visual buffer between the proposed building and Braeside Park in the long term.
4. All of the landscaping should contain upper and middle canopy vegetation as far as practicable given the intent is to screen any views of the buses and cars parking as well as the associated maintenance building, but I acknowledge the landscaping chosen also needs to take account of the open stormwater drain (or possible future underground drainage). I find the combination of the colorbond fence and landscaping will positively contribute to the landscape and visual quality of Braeside Park and result in a land use that has a low visual impact.

Alterations and Additions to Existing Buildings and Works

1. Mr Soding and Ms Lardner expressed some concern about the lack of detail contained in the permit application and amended plans about the alterations and additions to the existing buildings and works. This proposal involves a range of changes, and in my opinion improvements, to the car parking and access arrangements which has culminated in the need to undertake what I consider to be minor alterations and additions to Gardenworld. I am satisfied the detail of the alterations and additions can be satisfactorily provided as a condition of permit.

1. There was some discussion during the hearing about whether the hours of operation of the bus depot need to be restricted. I adopt the evidence of Mr Burton and find the hours do not need to be restricted on the basis that:
   1. The provision of a colorbond fence is adequate to control noise levels to the recommended noise limits to the land to the west;
   2. Distance attenuation alone is sufficient to reduce noise levels to the requirements of SEPP N-1 to the dwellings on the eastern side of Springvale Road; and
   3. The workshop hours should be restricted to exclude operation between 10.00pm and 7.00am.
2. Mr Burton's evidence assumed repairs within the workshop would be restricted to minor repairs and replacement of tyres, and I am of the opinion this should also be included as a condition of permit.
3. In regard to the colorbond fence, Mr Burton advised an agreement had been reached with Mentone Grammar School to erect a 2.4 metre high colorbond fence along the site's west rear boundary but Council's Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit requires a 2 metre high acoustic barrier along this boundary, and the amended plans refer to a 2 metre high colorbond fence. Mr Burton's analysis of the noise levels of the bus depot land use is based upon a 2.4 metre high colorbond fence. He stated it may be possible to reduce the height to 2.1 metres, but he had not analysed this. Based on this evidence, I have decided a colorbond fence rather than an acoustic fence is appropriate and it should be 2.4 metres high.

1. In the lead up to the hearing and during the hearing, Mr Aspinall advised VicRoads was satisfied with the traffic engineering works detailed in Mr de Waard's expert evidence report. As a result, Mr Aspinall provided amended conditions to replace condition 5 in Council's Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit. These conditions were generally agreed to by the permit applicant.
2. At the start of the hearing, Mr Noy tabled some suggested changes to condition 5, including one relating to the permit applicant paying for and constructing a new bus stop pad and flag (or paying the Department of Transport the necessary money). Mr Pitt submitted this should be included as a condition of the permit.
3. Mr Soding suggested some modifications to the conditions in Council's Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit, and Mr Pitt and Ms Lardner both commented on the appropriateness of the conditions. I have taken all of these submissions into consideration and modified the conditions as I consider necessary.

1. I am satisfied this proposal is appropriate having regard to the planning policy framework. This proposal is in accordance with the MSS and the South East Non Urban Area Policy. Subject to achieving an appropriate landscape treatment along the rear boundary of the site with Braeside Park, I am of the opinion this proposal will have a low visual impact. For all of these reasons, I will order that a permit be issued subject to appropriate conditions.

The development and use of a vehicle store (bus depot), alterations and additions to existing buildings and works, removal of native vegetation, and alterations to access and creation of new access to Springvale Road at 810-834 Springvale Road, Braeside in accordance with the endorsed plans.

The permit must contain the following conditions:

1. Before the development starts amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans substituted by the Tribunal, but modified to show:
   • (a) The rear boundary with Braeside Park constructed with a post and wire fence with a 2.4 metre high colorbond fence setback 3.5 metres from this boundary constructed along the edge of the internal bus access road and the staff parking area. A greater setback of the colorbond fence to provide for a larger landscaped area and a gate for access and maintenance should be provided to the west of the proposed bus depot building.
   • (b) A notation that the colorbond fence will contain colour(s) of muted natural tones, possibly green/olive with a contrasting lighter or darker green as recommended in section 5.2.1 of Mr Haack's expert evidence report dated 19 January 2009.
   • (c) Plans and elevations and a schedule of all external materials, colours and finishes (including samples) of the proposed alterations and additions to the existing buildings and works associated with Gardenworld and Collectors Corner.
   • (d) A schedule of all external materials, colours and finishes (including samples) of the proposed bus depot building.
   • (e) The surface material of all driveways and accessways nominated in an all weather concrete seal coat.
   • (f) The surface material of the bus parking bays nominated as a gravel surface.
   • (g) The location of the existing open stormwater drain at the site's west rear property boundary and any modifications required to the proposed layout undertaken so as to not affect the operation of the drain.
   • (h) A notation on the plans stating: "The open stormwater drain located at the rear of the property must be protected all times during construction".
   • (i) The existing 2.01m easement located at the rear of the site.
   • (j) Details of security/outdoor lighting including location, design and baffling.
   • (k) Details of wastewater treatment or sewerage.
   • (l) Details of any bunding to be provided to the above ground fuel tanks and proposed wash bay.
2. Before the development starts, a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plan must show:
   • (a) The location of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removed in accordance with Figure 2 of Mr Organ's expert evidence report dated January 2009.
   • (b) Landscaping and planting within the landscaped areas along the north and south side boundaries and within the modified landscaped areas along the Springvale Road frontage of the site.
   • (c) The inclusion of middle and upper canopy vegetation within the landscaped areas along the west rear boundary of the site taking account of the stormwater drain.
   • (d) A planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers, including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant
   • (e) All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
3. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.
4. Before the use starts, the land owner/developer must prepare and implement an Offset Management Plan for the provision of any native vegetation offsets and net gains associated with the removal of native vegetation approved under this permit, and address the location, ongoing management and legal protection of the offsets to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
5. The development of the site must be provided with stormwater mitigation works which will entail the detention of stormwater on site and/or the use water sensitive urban design principles (including re-use) to reduce stormwater run-off quantity and quality and improve discharge quality. Discussion with Councils Development Approvals Engineer is advised prior to a design being submitted. The stormwater system must be constructed in accordance with the approved drainage plan and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
6. Before the development hereby permitted commences, a drainage plan showing the stormwater discharge from the development to the nominated point must be submitted to the Responsible Authority for approval. The plan must be prepared by a qualified person and show all drainage works to the nominated point. The plan must also show all existing and proposed features that may have impact on the drainage (e.g. trees to be retained, crossings, services, fences, abutting buildings, existing boundary surface levels, etc).
7. Stormwater drainage of the site must be provided so as to prevent any overflows onto adjacent properties and be in accordance with the approved drainage plan.
8. The amenity of the area must not be detrimentally affected by the development and/or use, through the:
   • (a) Transport of materials, goods or commodities to or from the land.
   • (b) Appearance of any building, works or materials.
   • (c) Emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste water, waste products, grit or oil.
   • (d) Presence of vermin.
9. Construction on the site must be restricted to the following times:

Or otherwise as approved by the Responsible Authority in writing.

1. The use of the bus depot must not commence until all buildings and works and the conditions of this permit have been complied with, unless with the further consent of the Responsible Authority.
2. The use of the bus depot must not commence until all landscaping works as shown on the endorsed plans are completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
3. The bus depot workshop hours of operation are limited to between 7.00am and 10.00pm seven days a week unless otherwise approved to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
4. The repairs within the bus depot workshop are limited to minor repairs and replacement of tyres unless otherwise approved to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
5. Prior to the development being occupied, areas set aside for parking vehicles, access lanes and paths as shown on the endorsed plans must be:
   • (a) Constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
   • (b) Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans.
   • (c) Surfaced in accordance with the materials shown on the endorsed plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
   • (d) Drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
   • (e) Line-marked to indicate each car space, all access lanes and, if necessary, the directions in which vehicles are to travel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

1. The area designated on the endorsed plan for the purpose of loading and unloading of goods from vehicles shall be made available for such use and shall not be used for any other purpose.
2. In areas set aside for car parking, measures must be taken to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority to prevent damage to fences or landscaped areas.
3. All external surfaces of the building elevations must be finished in accordance with the schedule on the endorsed plans and maintained in good condition to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
4. Finished Floor Levels shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered or modified without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
5. No equipment, services and architectural features other than those shown on the endorsed plans shall be permitted above the roof level of the building unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the Responsible Authority.
6. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

1. Prior to the commencement of any works in Springvale Road, the land owner/developer must prepare the following documents to the satisfaction of VicRoads and the Responsible Authority:
   • (a) A functional layout plan of the proposed access arrangements to Springvale Road from the property, generally in accordance with drawing number GRP08812-06 dated 15 January 2009 and prepared by TraffixDesign.
   • (b) Detailed engineering plans of the roadworks required for the access arrangements at each access location.
   • (c) Traffic signal layout plans for the intersection of Springvale Road and the northern property access, and the intersection of the main central property access with Springvale Road opposite Keylana Drive, including public lighting and the proposed signal phasing.
   • (d) A Road Safety Audit report that reviews the detailed engineering plans of roadworks required for the access arrangements. The Road Safety Audit must be prepared by an independent VicRoads pre-qualified road safety auditor and prepared in accordance with Austroads-Road Safety Audit (Second Edition, 2002).
   • (e) Where the Road Safety Audit identifies any matters that have not been addressed in the detailed engineering plans they must be addressed and the plans amended to the satisfaction of VicRoads and the Responsible Authority.
2. Prior to the commencement of any roadworks along Springvale Road, the land owner/developer must:
   • (a) Provide a bank guarantee without a termination date to VicRoads for a sum equal to the estimated cost of works along Springvale Road.
   • (b) Provide a payment to VicRoads of the certification audit fee.
   • (c) Provide evidence that the Contractor has a public liability insurance policy for at least $10 million, effective for the duration of the works.
   • (d) Provide VicRoads with the name, address, business and out-of-hours telephone numbers of the principal roadworks contractor.
   • (e) Provide payment to VicRoads for all of its direct costs associated with the supply and installation of the traffic signals, power and telecommunication connections, and the predetermined cost of 10 years traffic signal maintenance for the new traffic signals at the access near the northern boundary.
3. The applicant must engage an approved VicRoads contractor (pre-qualified at the appropriate level or as otherwise approved) to undertake all roadworks along Springvale Road.
4. Where the roadworks, including footpath and nature strip, lie within private property along Springvale Road, a widening of the road reserve will be required, at no cost to VicRoads. The developer must engage a licensed surveyor to prepare a Plan of Subdivision showing the affected land labelled "ROAD," which is to be vested in the Roads Corporation upon certification of the Plan of Subdivision, without any encumbrances. Subsequent to the registration of the plan, the applicant must ensure that the original Certificates of the Title that issue in the name of the Roads Corporation, are forwarded via registered post to: VicRoads-Property Services Department, 60 Denmark Street KEW, 3101.
5. Prior to the commencement of any roadworks in, on, under or over the Springvale Road reservation the applicant must have first applied for the received written consent from VicRoads for those works in accordance with Section 63 of the Road Management Act 2004.
6. The applicant must arrange for and pay the full costs of all public works associated with the access arrangements to the property pursuant to this permit.
7. Before the use of the bus depot starts, the land owner/developer must arrange for all roadworks and traffic signal works to be completed in accordance with approved plans and to the satisfaction of VicRoads and the Responsible Authority.
8. The applicant must take all reasonable steps to ensure that disruption to bus operations along Springvale Road is kept to a minimum during the construction period. Any anticipated disruption to bus operations must be communicated, with mitigating measures, to the Director of Public Transport and Bus Operators one (1) week prior to commencement of works affecting bus operations.

1. Before the use of the bus depot starts, the land owner/developer must pay and construct the new bus stop pad and flag or pay the Department of Transport $3,500 to undertake the work as part of the Smart Bus upgrade to the satisfaction of the Department of Transport and the Responsible Authority.

1. No polluted and/or sediment laden runoff is to be discharged directly or indirectly into Melbourne Water's drains or watercourses.

2. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
   • (a) The development and use are not started within two years of the date of this permit.
   • (b) The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.

The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.

[1] This site is located next to a municipal boundary (being Springvale Road) between the Cities of Greater Dandenong and Kingston.

[2] Extract from page 7 of clause 21.02 in the MSS

[3] Extract from page 3 of clause 21.03 in the MSS

[5] Braeside Park is included in this policy and does form part of the 'Chain of Parks'.

[7] I wish to make the observation if the review site had a different context of being situated amongst open spaces and not proximate to urban and urban related uses, a bus depot would not be in accordance with the planning policy framework.

[8] Extract from pages 1-2 of clause 22.04

[10] The colorbond fence is shown along the rear boundary on the amended plans but Mr Haack's evidence was it may be setback 3 metres from the rear boundary. He was also unclear whether there would be 500mm of landscaping on the inside of the colorbond fence.

[11] This is only necessary for that part of the bus parking area that is adjacent to Braeside Park, as I note some of the rear boundary is also adjacent to the Mentone Grammar School sports fields.