Friends of Partingtons Flat Reserve v City Banyule [2001] VCAT 1742 (16 August 2001)

Alterations and additions to sports pavilion, Erection of pedestrian bridge, Liquor licence, Behavioural issues, Car parking, Appropriateness of access across a `ford', Ambit of discretion

APPLICANTS: Friends of Partingtons Flat Inc & Others

Medium Neutral Citation [2001] VCAT 1742

SUBJECT LAND: 27A Plenty River Drive (Partingtons

2. The Responsible Authority's decision is varied by the deletion of Condition 1(e). All other conditions appearing in the Notice of Decision dated 12 February 2001 must be included in the permit.

___________________ _________________

Mr. J. Cicero, Lawyer, represented the City of Banyule as Responsible Authority and Permit Applicant. Mr. Cicero called evidence from:

Mr. P. Rowland, Manager Leisure, Recreation and Cultural Services, Banyule City Council.

Mr. N. Maxwell and Ms. G. Ryan, Objectors, represented Friends of Partingtons Flat Inc. and others.REASONS

1. This is an Application for Review pursuant to Section 82 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 of the decision of Banyule City Council to issue a permit to carry out buildings and works to an existing open sports ground (including alterations and additions to the pavilion, construction of a footbridge, and alterations to parking areas to the north and south of Plenty River) and to enable the grant of a liquor licence in accordance with various conditions.

2. The Grounds of Application for Review were summarised as:

3. The application for permit is best described by reference to a letter from Mr. Phillip Rowland, Manager Leisure, Recreational and Cultural Services, City of Banyule to Ms. Jacki Tuckwell, Senior Planner, Development Services, Banyule City Council where the purpose sought was:

* Refurbishment of existing pavilion and public toilets.

* Construction of pedestrian bridge and associated shared pathways.

"The social facility will be used during the times provided for in the liquor licence. It is anticipated that a maximum of 100 people will attend any functions. It is anticipated that `major' functions will be held on six Saturday nights during the year. It is estimated that between 20 and 40 people will remain socialising following the conclusion of training. The lease with the club will prohibit the ability to sublet the facility."

"The application includes an application for a `Restricted Club Licence' authorising the supply of liquor to members, guests of members for consumption on the licensed premises".

6. The pavilion structure is depicted on plans by Raso Architects, and show most of the existing change rooms and toilets maintained whilst new referees boxes, stores, toilets, canteen, function room, bar and store will be erected. A new players race dividing the function room bar from the canteen and toilet facilities will be created.

7. New landscaping works, a new basketball stand and asphalt paving, upgraded picnic and playground facilities will be provided on the reserve. A new pedestrian bridge will be constructed over the Plenty River and an existing unsealed car park will be sealed to provide 17 car parking spaces whilst another unsealed car park will be constructed off Yando Street. These details are shown on the Partingtons Flat Concept Plan, November 2000, prepared by Thompson Berrill Landscape Design Pty Ltd.

b) The area of land on the north-western corner of Yando Street Kalparrin Avenue in Greensborough.,

9. Partingtons Flat Reserve, is as by the name, suggests a flat reserve surrounded for most parts by an attractive raised landscaped backdrop immediately north of the Plenty River. Access to it is via a Ford over the Plenty River from the prolongation of Kalparrin and Yando Streets. A relatively steep wooded hillside separates the more public open space on the Reserve from residential properties which adjoin the north, east and west sides of the Reserve. These residential properties were generally developed with detached housing dating from the 1970's and 1980's. Few dwellings are visible from inside the Reserve.

10. Pedestrian access to the Reserve is available from the Plenty River Drive, Manatunga Circuit, Diamond Creek Road, Ulmara Place, Kalparrin Avenue and by a walking track which runs along the Plenty River.

11. The sporting oval and existing pavilion are located above a 1:100 year flood line nominated by Melbourne Water at 42.50 AHD. However the Ford crossing is located well below this specified flood level and floods following heavy rain. In recent years gates have been constructed on either side of the Ford and vehicular access to the Reserve is currently restricted by the locked gates. Secondary vehicular access is available from Greensborough Road via an existing fire track, but this access is not available to the public.

12. There is an existing car park consisting of an open unmarked gravel area between the pavilion/existing cricket nets and the Plenty River. The fire track terminates at the car park and has access to it.

13. The Tribunal was advised the Reserve has been a venue for competitive local sports since 1969 and over that time sports have included hockey, cricket, lacrosse and soccer. The Reserve was utilised by the Diamond Valley Junior Lacrosse Club during the winter months and the Greensborough District Rangers Cricket Club in summer. Subsequently the Greensborough District Rangers Cricket Club folded and the Lacrosse Club has been relocated to other sports facilities within the Shire of Nillimbuk. The Reserve is now the new home of the Diamond Valley United Soccer Club.

14. It is proposed to provide 17 sealed car parking spaces on the existing unsealed car park area. Stormwater runoff in the parking area would be directed to vegetation swales with below infiltration to prevent sediment washing into the Plenty River. It is also proposed to construct a 25 space car park on the north-western corner of Yando Street and Kalparrin Avenue. A network of paths will link direct access from the car park and existing footpaths onto the Reserve across the proposed new pedestrian bridge. The Responsible Authority advised it also intends to rely on informal overflow parking area on the southern side of Yando Street adjacent to an existing child care centre.

15. The Soccer Club propose erecting two temporary coach boxes on the side of the field during matches but these will be removed after play and stored in the storage areas. There will also be new galvanised steel rail fencing to match existing perimeter fencing and there will also be temporary fencing erected on soccer match days. Existing cricket nets will be removed and replaced with landscaping.

16. It is proposed that the existing playground equipment on the eastern side of the Reserve will be consolidated into a mulched area, and a new basketball tower with asphalt under-surfacing in the area is currently proposed.

17. There will be a new upgrade of walking paths along the Reserve linking the Plenty River shared trail. The proposal also incorporates the construction of a pedestrian bridge over the river. The bridge would be sited above the 1:100 year flood level and would be located at the west of the northern car park and directly north of the southern car park. It will be supported by driven piles in order to minimise the extent and disturbance caused by the banks and surrounds.

18. The Tribunal was advised that it was not anticipated that there would be any alteration to existing light poles and fittings.

19. It was also proposed that a liquor licence be obtained. The hours of the licence are as follows:

20. The Tribunal was advised there will be restriction to public access to the Reserve at any time. Mr Cicero advised the Soccer Club proposes to request spectators attending senior matches on match days to pay a donation upon entry. It was advised that it was physically impossible to completely fence and gate-off the entire soccer field owing to topographic and physical features of the Reserve, including the various pedestrian access points.

21. The Tribunal was also advised that a Flood Response Plan had been developed and this sets out guidelines about access to the Ford and actions in the event of flooding across the Ford. This plan incorporates the following:

* Closure of the Ford crossing to the general public;

* Limitation of parking on the northern side of the river to Soccer Club officials, maintenance vehicles, deliveries and activities in relation to utilities;

* The installation of barriers on the crossing as required by Melbourne Water;

* Annual monitoring of the structural condition of the Ford;

* Regular clearance of any accumulated debris to the Ford;

* Installation of appropriate warning signage to the Ford at other entries to the Reserve and inside the pavilion.

22. Mr. Cicero advised the Flood Response Plan will be incorporated as part of the lease between the Council and the Soccer Club. The Tribunal was advised the Soccer Club will be issued with 5 keys to the Ford's gates which will facilitate access. In the event that the Ford is inundated or partially inundated, no vehicles associated with soccer activities will be permitted to cross the Ford. Rather the vehicles will remain in the overflow parking areas to the south of the Ford and players and officials will enter the Reserve via the pedestrian bridge.

23. The Tribunal was told that a previous application No. P4455/99 sought approval to construct additions to the existing pavilion and alterations to the car park and fencing. This matter was the subject of an Application for Review (1999/106274). The Tribunal stated:

"It appears to the Tribunal that in some senses the Responsible Authority appears to have taken the view that because of the permit application is for development only, and the proposed use is a permitted use of the land, then they need not turn their mind to the implications of the use of the land arising from the proposed development. Whist we agree that the ambit of discretion is more limited than would be the case if both the use and the development required permission, the Responsible Authority should turn its mind to the question of how the land might be used in its developed state to properly decide the question of whether or not the proposed development should be permitted. In this context it is apparent to the Tribunal that the information which forms part of the permit application is insufficient for the Tribunal to reasonably determine:

* Whether or not the proposed car parking bars any relationship o the car parking demand of the redeveloped sports ground.

* Whether or not it is appropriate to allow the development of a car park and function room in the proposed location having regard to the future amenity of nearby residents in the absence of any information about how these facilities may be used.

* The traffic and traffic safety implications arising from the use of the sports ground in its redeveloped state.

* The risks associated with the redevelopment of the sporting ground, by comparison to the existing risks, associated with the flood prone accessway.

* The effect of the proposed lighting towers, and the degree to which spill light could affect the amenity of nearby residents.

24. The Tribunal was also advised that an application for Enforcement Order (2000/62092) by Neil Maxwell concerning lighting poles illuminating the sports ground was dismissed on 20 February 2001. In that case residents had sought enforcement action against the Responsible Authority concerning the placement of training lights at the soccer ground. Senior Member Byard had found that no permit was required. He found that the activities were not works, but repairs to existing buildings for which planning permission was not required. He found there was no contravention of the planning scheme had been shown and no enforcement order was granted.

25. Mr. Cicero provided the following details of zone controls and policy in the Banyule Planning Scheme:

It is subject to the following two (sic) Overlay controls -

Under the Public Park and Recreation Zone no planning permit is required for the use of the land for the purpose of "open sports ground". The definition of "open sports grounds: in the Scheme is -

"Land used for sport, but which is available for informal outdoor leisure or recreation when not being used or prepared for an organised game. It may include lights, changerooms, pavilions and shelters. "

A permit is required however for buildings and works although there are a number of exemptions including the construction of fencing at a metre or less in height above natural ground level.

Planning approval is required for buildings and works and vegetation removal on land affected by this Overlay.

Planning approval is also required for buildings and works within the land effected by this Overlay control which includes the majority of the proposed parking areas to the south of the pavilion. The application was required to be referred to Melbourne Water as the relevant Referral Authority.

Given the number of components the proposal has the following table has been prepared which might clarify the permissions required -

Permit required by Public Park and Recreation Zone

Permit required by Environmental Significance Overlay

Permit required by Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (applies to part of the land)

* Note that a permit for the proposal liquor licence pursuant to clause 52.27 of the Scheme (refer below)

Clause 52.06 does not contain any specific parking requirement for an open sports ground use. However clause 52.06-3 provides -

"Before any use commences or any new building is occupied, the car spaces, access lanes, driveways and associated works and landscaping shown on the plan must, to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, be provided and available for use and be:

* Formed to such levels and drained so that they can be used in accordance with the plan.

* Treated with an all-weather seal or some other durable surface.

* Line-marked or provided with some other adequate means of showing the car spaces.

Under clause 52.27 a planning permit is required to consume liquor if a licence is required under the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998 where the hours of trading allowed under any licence are to be extended. Given that the proposal seeks approval to alter the hours of a Restricted Club Licence (including licensing during the winter months for which no licence currently exists) a permit is required for the component part of the proposal.

26. There are various State and Local Planning Policy matters which are relevant in this application including:

27. Mr. Cicero also referred the City of Banyules's Pubic Open Space Strategy, Environment Policy and Strategy and the Lower Plenty River Concept Plan (October 1994) as relevant reference documents outlined in the Municipal Strategic Statement.

28. Mr. Cicero also referred to the Plenty River Strategic Master Plan - Greensborough Bypass to Poulter Reserve. This Master Plan was prepared by Thompson Berrill Landscape Design Pry Ltd for the Responsible Authority and is dated February 2001. Thompson Landscape Design Pty Ltd also prepared a Partingtons Flat Concept Plan and was adopted by the Council at the same meeting at which it resolved to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for this application.

29. There were also various Referral Authority comments including Aboriginal Affairs Victoria, which required the following conditions in the event of a permit being issued:

* The applicant is to conform to the recommendations as outlined on page 7 of the draft report An Archaeological Impact Assessment of a Proposed Footbridge Across the Plenty River at Kalparrin Avenue, Greensborough by Marshall; and

* Prior to the disturbance of any identified Aboriginal site, place or object, the applicant is to seek and obtain written consent to disturb from the relevant local Aboriginal community, as nominated for the purposes of Part IIA of the (Commonwealth) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984".

30. The Tribunal was told that an Archaeological Impact Assessment Report referred to was commissioned by Council as part of the formulation of the current permit application.

31. Melbourne Water also advised it had no objection, but placed various requirements including nominating a Point of Discharge for the car parks, treatment of stormwater from the car parks and sealing of car park surfaces.

32. Comments were received from the Yarra/Plenty River Co-ordinator regarding the need for a Flood Response Plan.

33. Mr. Cicero submitted that the Council took on board the comments of the Tribunal in the earlier Decision and had put before the Tribunal a detailed application which has been thoroughly analysed at both council level and at a community level. Mr. Cicero called evidence from Mr. Phillip Rowland, Manager, Leisure Recreation and Cultural Services, City of Banyule. Mr. Rowland outlined in detail various feasibility studies, open space strategies and projects undertaken by the City of Banyule which led to the decision to use Partingtons Flat Reserve for a soccer field, and how this culminated in the current application for planning permit. Mr. Rowland advised that the planning and policy development for the proposed development of Partingtons Flat Reserve to provide for playing and social requirements goes back to 1996. He advised it had first been identified as an issue during an assessment of hockey and athletics facilities in June 1996 where various recommendations were made to the Council to upgrade athletics facilities at Olympic Park West Heidelberg and relocate the Diamond Valley United Soccer Club.

34. Mr. Rowland advised the City of Banyule had undertaken an Open Space Strategy in July 1997 to assist Council to enhance public open space assets and opportunities across the City. He advised surveys involving the general community, young people and Primary School children were conducted and Community forums were also held. Following on from this project the Responsible Authority undertook a Parks and Open Space planning project which included Partingtons Flat Reserve in Greensborough. He advised a Strategic Master Plan was prepared for the Plenty River, Greensborough Bypass to Poulter Reserve. Following this, the Council exhibited the Plenty River Strategic Master Plan (prepared by Thompson Berrill Landscape Design Pty Ltd) for the Greensborough Bypass to Poulter Reserve section of the river. It was subsequently adopted in March 2001.

35. Mr. Rowland outlined the Supply and Demand for Open Space and Sporting Facilities in the North East Sector of Banyule - September 1998 which was prepared by Council staff and where the relocation of the Diamond Valley United Soccer Club to Partingtons Flat Reserve for summer and winter use was identified as an issue which needed to be resolved in the locality.

36. Mr. Rowland advised that the site selection of Partingtons Flat Reserve as a soccer venue was considered following examination of a number of sites throughout the municipality. He claimed Partingtons Flat Reserve was the preferred option by Council on the basis of its geographic location, that it did not impact on other sporting clubs and that a basic level of infrastructure was present. He advised that the Cricket Club had folded and the Junior Lacrosse Club has been able to accommodate its playing requirements in the Shire of Nillumbik.

37. Mr. Rowland advised the Diamond Valley United Soccer Club had a broad membership catchment throughout the Greensborough area and the Partingtons Flat Reserve location is consistent with its catchment pattern. He claimed that junior players are drawn locally from Greensborough, Briar Hill and Watsonia areas and that the Clubs had been formed by the amalgamation of Eltham, Greensborough and Heidelberg Soccer Clubs in 1989. He advised that senior players are drawn from a wider catchment.

38. Mr. Rowland advised that following the Tribunal's determination not to grant a permit with respect to Application No. P455/99, Council officers met with members of the Friends of Partingtons Flat Group on two occasions to discuss possible alternative plans to redevelop the Reserve. He advised that in addition to these meetings, newsletters were sent to approximately 170 surrounding residents in June 2000, and approximately 3000 surrounding residence in September and November 2000. He also advised that a pre-application consultation meeting was held on 23 November 2000 and a further consultation meeting was held on 20 December 2000 in order to ensure maximum attendance particularly having regard to the time of the year.

39. Mr. Cicero called evidence from Joanna Thompson, Landscape Architect, who outlined the background to the Landscape Concept Plan including the Plenty River Strategic Master Plan - Greensborough Bypass to Poulter Reserve and the Partingtons Flat Concept Plan. Ms. Thompson outlined reasons for the design including the siting of the pavilion extension, landscape treatment around the pavilion, picnic barbecue and play area, proposed planting throughout the Reserve and also outlined in detailed environmental values and heritage values.

40. Mr. Cicero called Mr. Nicholas Tineo, Structural Engineer, whose evidence in chief was:

"The Ford appears to be structurally sound with no evidence of significant structural deterioration. However the condition of the concrete embankments should be monitored on a regular basis (12 months intervals) and any necessary maintenance carried out. The section of concrete skin on the north-east embankment where cracking was observed should be monitored at 6 monthly intervals. If this section of wall deteriorates further then some remedial work may need to be undertaken."

41. Mr. Tineo had advised that he had inspected the Ford on a number of occasions including January 2001 and June 2001 and reported no noticeable deterioration of the structure.

42. Mr. Cicero called evidence from Mr. Alan Prentice, Traffic Engineer, whose conclusions were:

"The peak demand for carparking associated with the Soccer Club will occur on a Saturday during the winter season when large numbers of spectators can be expected to be present. The maximum carparking demand at this time is estimated to be 150 spaces. As no activities are held at Whatmough Park on a Saturday during the winter season, this also represents the peak demand generated by both venues.

A similar carparking demand (148 cars) would also be generated on a Sunday during the winter season when junior matches are held at both Partington's Flat reserve (soccer matches) and Whatmough Park (Australian Rules Football).

The existing and proposed parking provision within the immediate vicinity of these two venues (205 spaces) is more than adequate to provide for the demand on a Sunday during the winter season, as all parking is conveniently located to one venue or the other.

On a Saturday during the winter season, no activities are held at Whatmough Park and the parking at Whatmough Park (54 spaces) is considered to be too far (350 metres) from Partington's Flat Reserve to be considered as convenient parking. Consequently, only 151 conveniently located spaces would be available for the Soccer Club. This is one more than the peak demand on a Saturday during the winter season and is considered satisfactory.

Traffic access arrangements to Partington's Flat reserve and nearby parking areas have been reviewed and are considered satisfactory and safe. In addition, it is considered that the layout of the intersection of Yando Street and Kalparrin Avenue should not be changed.

Finally, there are no traffic or parking issues, amongst the issues raised by objectors to the proposal, that would justify not granting a permit for the proposal."

43. During his evidence, Mr. Prentice tabled a revised estimate of expected car parking demands wherein he corrected a number of estimated peak parking demands. In this evidence it was found that the estimated peak car parking demand for soccer was higher than anticipated, but he claimed it was still lower than the maximum peak parking demand for Saturday competitions, which was the highest.

44. Mr. Cicero advised that it was proposed to alter the current liquor licence associated with the Cricket Club. This was later clarified as:

(The Tribunal notes the times for major functions was set in the Notice of Decision on a Friday, whereas the application originally cited Saturday).

45. Mr. Cicero also advised that the provision of a pedestrian bridge will improve year round pedestrian access to the Reserve and will be more convenient to all users having a significantly smaller gradient. He claimed the pedestrian bridge across the Reserve is in addition to the existing pedestrian access across the Ford.

46. In conclusion Mr. Cicero claimed that there was strong evidence by independent experts to demonstrate the proposal was an acceptable planning outcome and will result in a net community benefit with the opportunity being provided as a result of the relocation of the Soccer Club to Partingtons Flat Reserve to improve its useability and general appearance and presentation.

47. Mr. Maxwell and Ms. Ryan provided a very detailed submission including a thorough history of activity on Partingtons Flat Reserve. This submission goes to some 70 pages and included four volumes of attachments and photographs, and a video depicting flooding conditions at the Ford in the Plenty River. Suffice to say the Tribunal will provide a summary only of the submission.

Advertising (Public Notification and Documentation)

48. The Objectors held strong criticism about the manner in which the application for permit was notified including the location of notices, lack of display on the actual building, and lack of notice to other residents and sporting clubs in the area.

49. Mr. Maxwell outlined in detail a number of inconsistencies with documents associated with the planning application when it was publicly notified. Some of these discrepancies referred to an existing liquor licence on the site, inconsistencies in description of the pavilion including discrepancies in the total building size, inconsistency in advice about what Soccer Federation requirements were, inconsistency in access/fire track width, details about vegetated buffer strips, and the Flood and Fire Emergency Response Plan. Some of the strongest criticisms about lack of consultation were best summed up with the following statement:

"Representatives from the local community made every effort to meet with councillors. Yet councillors chose not to return calls, respond to open invitations at council or written invitations to meet on site and discuss concerns related to the new proposal. Most disappointing is the fact that the member for Beale Ward, Greg Ryan our local representative was not in attendance at any of the information meetings set by Council and attended by his local constituents.

The communication and consultation process afforded other developments and the guidelines formulated by the Banyule City Council itself have not been implemented in the case of the Partington's Flat."

50. Mr. Maxwell outlined a number of attempts to seek information from Council officers and these included Freedom of Information requests to both Council and Melbourne Water. The objectors were also concerned about some of the timing of consultations including the holding of a meeting on 20 December 2000 where it was alleged that the meetings were information nights to present plans and inform locals of what the Council intentions were, not consultation meetings. He claimed that despite lots of note taking and at times firey debate and 69 written objections, no alterations to the proposal or conditions of use resulted. Mr. Maxwell's criticism of the project also referred to the escalating cost of the project and was of the view that it seemed it was being relocated at any cost.

51. Mr. Maxwell was highly critical of the Council's decision to relocate the Soccer Club and claimed it resulted in a substantial increase in usage of the Partingtons Flat Reserve. He argued this was best demonstrated by the increase in parking and the provision of a bus zone. Mr. Maxwell also argued that the usage had changed from a minor sports and recreation facility to a major sports and recreation facility, that is land use for a leisure recreational sport where there is substantial provision made for spectators, such as a grandstand and to which spectators are usually charged admission. He based this on the understanding that spectators will be charged an entry fee.

52. Mr. Maxwell was critical of lighting spill from lights used for training purposes and their effect on nearby residential properties.

53. Mr. Maxwell outlined concerns about noise of soccer matches, after match celebrations, starting of cars, slamming of doors and general yahooing, and claimed this was amplified by the natural topography of Partingtons Flat. He claimed this was contrary to Clause 15.05 of the State Planning Policy Framework which stated "Planning authorities should ensure community amenity is not reduced by noise emission." He also stated the effects of soccer practice are taking their toll in residents living in close proximity to the Reserve and claimed residents are being required to relocate from bedrooms to studies on other sides of their house. He also referred to Mrs. Bryan's concern about offensive language, noise associated with disposing of beer bottles and members of the club leaving the clubrooms and disturbing the neighbourhood.

54. Mr. Maxwell was concerned that the Diamond Valley Soccer Club provided conflicting information regarding to the times of use, conditions and procedures involved in obtaining liquor licence. He claimed there was no liquor licence in operation.

55. Mr. Maxwell also raised safety concerns, firstly about inconsistent information regarding the fire tracks required around the reserve, and secondly for people using the Ford.

56. In terms of heritage Mr. Maxwell argued that there was insufficient assessment of the heritage of the Ford crossing the river and that the proposed works to the Ford had not been authorised by Heritage Victoria.

57. Mr. Maxwell was critical of traffic management proposed for the use and traffic assessment undertaken for the Responsible Authority. He cited examples where the Ford had not been locked in recent times, and claimed it was only since residents voiced strong concerns that Council had taken steps to close the gates to the Ford. He was of the view that it was inappropriate to have a car park on the northern side of the Plenty River.

58. Mr. Maxwell was concerned that a bus drop-off area proposed near the child care centre and the proposed pedestrian path will provide a link between this and the pedestrian bridge. He claimed that further investigation was required into the design of the pedestrian crossing point over Yando Street. He claimed that Council had not shown how they plan to ensure safe passage of pedestrians from the child care centre across Yando Street to the pedestrian bridge, and that with increased pedestrian and vehicular traffic at the Yando and Kalparrin Avenue intersection, it was necessary for the Council to install satisfactory street lighting to illuminate the area. He claimed they had been told verbally by Council that traffic management work were not within the scope of this development and would not be considered.

59. Mr. Maxwell claimed the car parking assessment prepared in November 2000 was shown to have been based on incorrect assumptions including the number of times the Ford floods. He also claimed that the car parking assessment understates the number of participants that attend the Soccer Club on Saturday afternoons. He claimed there was a need for 182 car parking spaces, just for players and officials, and that the car park assessment of 148 cars made no allowance for spectators. He also claimed there was a greater parking requirement for the function room.

60. Mr. Maxwell was also critical of any enforcement of planning permits, and in particular cited cases where vehicles had used the Ford to undertake repairs to the Club Rooms and lighting facility contrary to the intent of agreements. He claimed that the Council was not enforcing its owns Flood Emergency Response Plan.

61. During the hearing and on reading of many the objections raised, the Tribunal made comment on what was considered to be the ambit of its discretion in this application. It did this on the basis that most of the areas of complaint raised by Objectors, seem to stem from the decision of Banyule City Council to relocate the Diamond Valley Soccer Club to Partingtons Flat Reserve.

62. The Tribunal heard detailed evidence from Mr. Phillip Rowland, Manager Leisure, Recreation and Cultural Services, Banyule City Council, about the process undertaken by the Responsible Authority which led to it deciding to relocate the Soccer Club. The Tribunal is not in a position to review that decision. It is not in a position to say whether the community consultation which led to the decision was appropriate or otherwise, but it is quite obvious that there is a group of residents in the community who are upset, frustrated and apparently resentful at being either left out of the decision process or disappointed with its outcome. The Tribunal sympathises with those residents although that it is little consolation for this decision which dismisses their Application for Review.

63. What is apparent from the evidence provided, and in particular the traffic evidence, is that the Soccer Club generates a substantially larger number of vehicles and traffic movements particularly on training nights, and Saturdays and Sunday afternoons than previous occupants of the Reserve. We suspect that parking will be stretched on occasions in those parking areas south of the Plenty River. We also suspect the sealing of the car park on the northern side of the river abutting the club rooms will have limited direct benefit to most players and visitors to the reserve because of the limitation of vehicle access across the Ford. We also acknowledge that when the Soccer Club and nearby Australian Rules football ground are operating at peak capacity, there is the potential for shortages in car parking and traffic conflicts, and that these may have flow on impacts resulting in Soccer Players and/or spectators parking in Ulmara Place on occasions. However, with that being said, the Tribunal is bound to consider the matters which are the subject of the ambit of discretion, and these matters relate to:

* the impact of the physical extension of the clubrooms

* other landscape and upgrading works to the parks and reserves

* erection of a pedestrian bridge across the Plenty River

64. On the basis of the evidence submitted the Tribunal is in agreement with Mr. Cicero's submission, and therefore the Responsible Authority's decision, that the proposed building works to the pavilion are acceptable and an appropriate built form on this suburban parkland. It is also satisfied that the holding of functions at the various times prescribed in the Council's conditions is appropriate for a suburban scale Soccer Club. It considers the limitations on the number of "major" functions (with a maximum patronage of 100 persons) to six per year would seem reasonable given the type of venue, its location, the availability of car parking and vehicular and pedestrian access to the site.

65. We also consider the construction of 17 car parking spaces on the northern side of the Plenty River is reasonable and will assist to reduce adverse environmental impacts on the Plenty River.

66. The evidence of Mr. Prentice demonstrated that patrons of competitive soccer and football on Saturdays and Sundays may have to walk up to 250 metres from where they park their cars. These activities do not require a permit, and therefore related parking was not a matter that was before us.

67. The evidence was that, applying the Planning Scheme requirements, the proposed facility for which a permit was required, and which was before us, would generate a demand for 54 car spaces. A total of six activities that would generate such a demand would be permitted per year. Some patrons would have to park their vehicles 250 metres from the venue. This would be acceptable, particularly for the few occasions on which it would apply.

68. Mr. Prentice said that if the St Mary's Junior Football Club conducted a major function at the same time as a function was conducted in the proposed facility, the total car parking demand would be significantly less than the peak demand on a Saturday or Sunday. Such an occurrence would obviously be infrequent, given that there would be a maximum of six such functions at the proposed facility per year, we do not consider that it would result in any unacceptable parking impact.

69. The Tribunal is satisfied that suitable restrictions have been inserted in the conditions on permit and the lease to the Soccer Club to prevent usual usage of the car park by members of the public and that all reasonable steps have been established to ensure adequacy of safety for patrons using the park.

70. The Tribunal considers the development of a pedestrian bridge across the Plenty River will not only benefit the Soccer Club and Partingtons Flat Reserve in general, but it would also assist other pedestrians who live in dwellings on the northern side of the Plenty River to access public transport, community facilities, and the Greensborough Activity Centre. The Tribunal notes the objectors supported this part of the planning application.

71. The Tribunal considers the proposed landscaping works and upgrading of the park to be eminently sensible and will contribute to improved access useability and appreciation of that community facility.

72. The Tribunal acknowledges that the Objectors wish to have the basketball ring and asphalt paving around it included in this application. During the hearing the Tribunal was told that some parties expressed concern about its location, however no person at the hearing raised any objection to this. Mr. Cicero conceded the Responsible Authority was ambivalent about this matter. The Tribunal considers it to be appropriate feature in a public park and the structure/paving will not detract from the appearance of the park.

73. The Tribunal is satisfied that car parking generated from with the function rooms/clubrooms, is appropriate. Judging by the evidence from Mr. Prentice, the greatest peak usage is on training nights (at 5.30pm on Thursday) or around 1 or 1.30pm on Saturdays and Sundays. These peaks are mainly generated when Juniors and Seniors are all present and there is a doubling up for a brief time in parking demands, however these peaks quickly subside. However these peaks in traffic generation relate to the conduct of soccer games and training, they are not related to the peak demands for the function rooms. The traffic evidence, which was not contradicted, demonstrated that peak parking demands for function rooms were much lower (ie. 54 car spaces) than the peaks during training and weekend soccer games, which can comfortably be contained in nominated parking areas in Kalparrin Drive, Yando Street and the northern side of the Plenty River.

74. Residents expressed a number of concerns about potential safety matters related to the use of the Ford. The Tribunal heard no evidence of any major safety issues and it was acknowledged by Mr. Maxwell that much of these concerns really derived out of perceived fears by residents. The Tribunal acknowledges the video of flooding conditions of the Plenty River. It also acknowledges that people cross the Ford at present during flooding periods at their own risk. Such occurrences appear to have been happening ever since the Ford was constructed in about 1969, yet there is no evidence of any serious mishaps. Hopefully this issue would be diminished when the pedestrian bridge is erected as part of this application.

75. Following the review hearing, the Tribunal (as requested) was provided with advice from Heritage Victoria that the Ford was not listed on the Heritage Register.

76. The Tribunal is satisfied that the public notification process was adequately undertaken. It notes there were a substantial number of persons who lodged objections. In addition, a number of meetings were held to discuss the project. Whilst the objectors may have wished for a better "consultation" process, this is not say they were denied their opportunity to place objections with the Responsible Authority, nor did it prevent them having access to a review of the Responsible Authority's decision.

77. The Tribunal acknowledges that there were some discrepancies in information provided by the Responsible Authority, however it is satisfied by the evidence and the conditions placed on the Notice of Decision that the purpose sought is clear, and the conditions enforceable. It does not consider there would be any merit in rejecting the application after this extensive planning application and review process.

78. The Tribunal does not consider the Soccer Club use would constitute a "major sports and recreation facility". The definition of Major Sports and Recreation Facility in the Planning Scheme is:

"Land used for leisure, recreation or sport, and where there is substantial provision made for spectators, such as a grandstand, and to which spectators are usually charged admission."

79. The definition of a Minor Sports and Recreation Facility is:

"Land use for leisure, recreation, or sport, without substantial provision for spectators, and which is usually open to non-paying spectators."

80. Judging by the information tabled at the review hearing, it is not possible or feasible to enclose the sports ground by fence and gates. Spectators who do attend soccer matches may be requested to pay a donation. This is a clear distinction to a major sports and recreation facility where there are substantial provision for spectators such as in a grandstand. This facility does not provide a grandstand, nor is it possible to charge admission.

81. The Tribunal is satisfied the matters before it will not cause adverse amenity impacts by excessive noise. The Tribunal accepts that residents may not like to hear supporters cheering at a local soccer ground, but that in itself is derived from an activity which does not require a planning permit.

82. The Tribunal is satisfied that the Responsible Authority's decision was essentially correct. It has made minor changes to conditions on permit to address matters raised at the hearing. The Tribunal is in no position to review the decision made by Banyule City Council some years ago to relocate the Soccer Club onto the Partingtons Flat Reserve. It acknowledges there is an element of community disappointment, distrust and resentment towards the City of Banyule, and this was probably reinforced by the previous inadequate application for permit. However the Tribunal is satisfied, on the basis of the detailed submission and evidence tabled that the Council's decision was correct, and the appropriate measures have been inserted by way of conditions and management plans to ensure the proposal is consistent with the objectives and provisions of the Planning Scheme. The Tribunal is satisfied that the matters, which are the subject of the application for permit will not have an unreasonable impact on the amenity of the locality.

___________________ _________________