1. The Applicants for Review refer to a range of Clause 54 objectives and standards that it is submitted, are not achieved and which consequently contribute to unacceptable amenity impacts. These include Clause 54.02-1 Neighbourhood Character (Standard A1), Clause 54.03-3 Site coverage (A5), Clause 54.04-4 Side and rear setbacks (A10), Clause 54.04-2 Walls on boundaries (A11), Clause 54.04-3 Daylight to existing windows (A12), Clause 54.04-5 Overshadowing open space (A14).
2. In broad terms, the Applicant for Review submits that the proposal's noncompliance with each of the Clause 54 standards is symptomatic of an overdevelopment and are required to be addressed in order to reduce amenity impacts on the dwelling at 55 Moubray Street. The cumulative impacts of the Clause 54 noncompliance relate to visual bulk, reduction in daylight to habitable room windows, and overshadowing of private open space and clerestory windows[2].
3. The review site is located within a highly urbanised, residential context and consequently any consideration of Clause 54 noncompliance and amenity impacts generally, must be undertaken having regard to reasonable amenity expectations arising from the site's highly urbanised context.
4. This is a locality in which dwelling site coverage is relatively high and walls on boundaries are commonplace. Consequently, reduced levels of daylight to habitable rooms, increased overshadowing of private open spaces and visual bulk impacts represent typical conditions.
5. Compliance with each or all of the standards of Clause 54 is uncommon in this neighbourhood. Most if not all existing dwellings would not achieve that outcome.
6. In circumstances where Clause 54 standards are not met, I am required to be satisfied that the relevant objectives of Clause 54 are achieved. The review site's location within a highly urbanised context is relevant to my consideration of these matters.
7. With respect to each of the impacts identified above, my findings are as follows:
   • The proposal's acceptable response to this neighbourhood's heritage character has been addressed above. The Applicant for Review sought to link heritage and neighbourhood character and to this extent I am satisfied that neighbourhood character issues under Clause 54 have also been satisfied.
   • This is not a location in which site coverage ought to be limited to 60%. I am satisfied that the relevant objective is met[3]. While I acknowledge that the proposed site coverage of 88% is relatively high it is not excessive in a neighbourhood in which most dwellings exhibit a site coverage well in excess of 60%.
   • The impact of the proposal on daylight to existing windows is acceptable and the objective of Clause 54.04-3 is met[4]. At ground floor level the dwelling at 55 Moubray Street has a light court (5.46m2) with windows serving the kitchen, living area and a bedroom, and an east facing double window which faces the external courtyard accessed from the living area. At the first floor there is a bedroom window affected by the proposal. The requirement of standard A12 to provide a light court of 3 square metres with a minimum dimension of 1 metre clear to the sky is achieved through the combination of the setbacks and building heights. The proposed wall opposite the clerestory window associated with the living area of No.55 will continue to receive daylight because the clerestory window sits above the proposed ground floor wall and the proposal is setback 1.0m. Having regard to the existence of the east facing windows in the living area of No.55, that living area will continue to receive daylight in accordance with the relevant Clause 54 objective. With respect to the first floor windows the combination of the building setbacks and the orientation of the windows ensure that daylight will continue to be available.
   • The additional overshadowing of secluded private open space is not significant when considered in the context of the parameters set by Clause 54.04-5[5]. I acknowledge that the secluded private open space at No.55 does not currently receive sunlight in accordance with Standard A14 but the additional shadow cast by the proposed extension occurs at 2.00pm (equinox) and is barely perceptible (about 0.2m2 increasing to about 2.4m2 by 3.00pm. The reduction in sunlight of that magnitude has no significant effect on the existing use of the secluded private open space.
   • With respect to walls on boundaries, the issue is confined to that section of the wall adjacent to the existing light court. The permit applicant is content to accept a condition requiring that section of the wall to be reduced from 3.5m (RL6.21) to 3.00m (RL5.90) so that it will comply with standard A11. I am satisfied that compliance with the standard is sufficient to also achieve the relevant objective[6].

1. It follows from the above reasons that it is my conclusion that the decision of the responsible authority should be varied and a permit issued.
2. The permit will include the conditions contained in the Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit issued by the responsible authority with modifications which have regard to the submissions and evidence of the parties and the matters which arise from my reasons.
3. At the hearing the Council advised me that it had inadvertently excluded a number of permit conditions it would normally apply to an application of this type. The conditions relate to various water sensitive design issues and related ESD outcomes.
4. The permit applicant opposes the imposition of the additional conditions because a comprehensive ESD report had been submitted with the permit application. I have therefore imposed a permit condition requiring that the development proceed in accordance with that ESD report.

• Part demolition and the construction of alterations and additions to an existing dwelling.

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 submitted with the application but modified to show:
   • (a) Building heights to be expressed to Australian Height Datum (AHD).
   • (b) The height of the wall on the southern boundary adjacent to the courtyard at No.55 Moubray Street reduced from 3.5m (RL6.21) to 3.0m (RL5.90).
   • (c) Screening to habitable room windows and terraces at first floor level to the southern elevation and eastern elevation:
     • Be drawn to scale and fully dimensioned;
     • Clearly delineate any solid parts of the screen and any louvre or batten parts of the screen;
     • Clearly illustrate how any louvre or batten system may allow upward views but will prevent downward views to neighbouring properties;
     • Show the exact width and thickness of each louvre or batten, the exact spacing between each louvre or batten and a section detail from behind the screen demonstrating that direct views of adjacent private open space and habitable room windows are precluded, while allowing outlook upward from window.

1. Before the development starts (other than demolition or works to remediate contaminated land), a full schedule of materials, finishes and paint colours, including colour samples (colour samples in a form that is able to be endorsed and held on file), must be submitted to, be to the satisfaction of and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.

1. Prior to the commencement of the works permitted by this permit, including any demolition works, a fully detailed 'demolition method statement' from a qualified structural engineer must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. The report must be prepared by a qualified structural engineer. When approved, the statement will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The 'demolition method statement' must fully describe and clearly demonstrate that the construction methods to be used on site will ensure that the building fabric required to be retained on the endorsed plans approved under Condition 1 of the permit will be safeguarded during and after the demolition process has occurred. The demolition method statement may need to include reference to staging of demolitions on site in some instances. The statement must detail the necessary protection works required to retain individual walls, chimneys, flooring, roofing and other heritage features of significance during demolition.

1. The development and colours, materials and finishes as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority, unless the Port Phillip Planning Scheme exempt the need for a permit.

1. Prior to the occupation of the building(s) allowed by this permit, all new or extended walls on or facing the boundary of adjoining properties and/or the laneway must be cleaned and finished to a uniform standard. Unpainted or unrendered masonry walls must have all excess mortar removed from the joints and face and all joints must be tooled or pointed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Painted or rendered or bagged walls must be finished to a uniform standard to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

1. All piping and ducting (excluding down pipes, guttering and rainwater heads) must be concealed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

1. No plant, equipment or domestic services (including any associated screening devices) or architectural features, other than those shown on the endorsed plan are permitted, except where they would not be visible from a street (other than a lane) or public park without the written consent of the responsible authority.

1. The development must be carried out in accordance with the ESD and water sensitive design report submitted with the permit application (report prepared by Ecoresults report no. 2016/555/SDA amended 10 May 2016) to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

1. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
   • (a) The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.
   • (b) The development is not completed within two years of the date of commencement of works.

The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing:

• before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the use or development allowed by the permit has not yet started; and
• within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.

[1] The submissions and evidence of the parties, any supporting exhibits given at the hearing, and the statements of grounds filed; have all been considered in the determination of the proceeding. In accordance with the practice of the Tribunal, not all of this material will be cited or referred to in these reasons.

[2] Clause 54.04-4 relating to North Facing Windows is not applicable to this application.

[3] The objective is: To ensure that the site coverage respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and responds to the features of the site

[4] The objective is: To allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows.

[5] The objective is: To ensure buildings do not unreasonably overshadow existing secluded private open space

[6] The objective is: To ensure that the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings.