For the reasons set out above, we conclude that the proposal is acceptable having regard to the policies and provisions of the Whitehorse Planning Scheme and we will direct that a permit be granted.
[2]
Before the use and development starts, or any trees or vegetation removed, amended plans (three copies) shall be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be drawn to scale, with dimensions, and be generally in accordance with the submitted plans but modified to show:
(a) All bicycle spaces to meet the requirements of Clause 52.34, Bicycle facilities of the Whitehorse Planning Scheme and AS 2890.3-1993.
(b) The proposed parking bays, circulation roadways and parking isles dimensioned and designed in accordance with the Whitehorse Planning Scheme and/or Section 2.4 of AS 2890-1 and Section 4 of AS 2890.2.
(c) The vehicle queue length at the entry point to satisfy Section 3.4 of AS 2890.1.
(d) Provision of a longitudinal section of the proposed ramps from the centre line of the road to, and throughout the parking area, to demonstrate compliance with Section 2.5 and 3.3 of AS 2890.1.
(e) All proposed column locations and spacing within the car park in accordance with Section 5.2 of AS 2890.1.
(f) The basement headroom at the entry point and throughout the car park in accordance with Section 5.3 of AS 2890.1 and demonstrated by provision of a cross section.
(g) The sight distance at the access driveway exit to meet the requirements of Section 3.2.4 of AS 2890.1.
(h) A car parking space in the basement for the exclusive use of disabled persons, to be located as close as practicable to the front entrance to the building to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
(i) The proposed vehicle crossing designed and constructed in accordance with Council's standard vehicle crossing details and existing unused vehicle crossings removed and replaced with footpath, naturestrip and kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
(j) External screens or other screening mechanisms for the west facing balconies of Units A202 and A302 and the south facing balcony to Unit C210.
(k) Detail of screening shown on plans and required by Condition 1(j) above to meet Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-5 of the Whitehorse Planning Scheme.
(l) Provision of 6 cubic metres of storage for the 23 dwellings in Building A.
(m) Correct correlation of elevations and floor plans.
(n) Landscape plan in accordance with Condition 10 of this permit
(o) Waste management plan in accordance with Condition 5 of this permit.
[3]
All of the above must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Once approved these plans become the endorsed plans of this permit.
[4]
The layout of the site and the size, design and location of the buildings and works permitted must always accord with the endorsed plan and must not be altered or modified without the further written consent of the Responsible Authority.
Prior to commencing any buildings and works, the owner must enter into an agreement with the Responsible Authority pursuant to Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
[5]
The agreement for the use of the two residential buildings hereby approved shall provide that:-
[6]
(a) In the event that the buildings are no longer required for student accommodation, and the use of the building is to be a Section 1 Use in the zone, written approval must be obtained from the Responsible Authority. Prior to granting approval for a new use pursuant to Section 1, the Responsible Authority must consider the following:-
(i) the provision of car parking spaces;
(ii) open space requirements;
(iii) internal layout and provision of living space; and
(iv) any other relevant matter.
(b) The requirements of the Site Management Plan, as approved by the Responsible Authority, are complied with.
(c) The development (for the two residential buildings) shall be for the exclusive use of students enrolled full or part time at a tertiary institution and shall be vacated by the student within three months of that student's completion of such studies.
(d) All rooms shall be managed by a single management entity and shall not be leased or otherwise managed other than under the control of that management entity.
Before the use allowed by this permit starts, a Site Management 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 this permit. The plan must include (but is not limited to):
(a) Limitation on the maximum number of students occupying the buildings constructed for student accommodation (shown as Buildings B & C) to 80 persons at any one time;
(b) Ensure that on site car parking as allocated for student accommodation is exclusively and efficiently used by students residing in the subject premises and shall not be leased, sold or used for any other purposes;
(c) Ensure all car parking spaces as allocated for student accommodation remain in common property and are available for general usage and not sold or allocated to any specific apartment;
(d) Management of clothes drying facilities to ensure that no laundry drying occurs on the balconies of the units;
(e) Supervision of students within the development including measures to limit noisy and anti-social behaviour and address any issues arising;
(f) Maintenance of the building and surrounds;
(g) Security of the building and surrounds;
(h) Limiting use of fire escape stairs for that purpose alone;
(i) Management of communal spaces including areas to be set aside for smoking;
(j) Limiting the use of the communal open space area to no later than 10pm on any day;
(k) Signage to be displayed on the building to provide 24 hour telephone contact numbers; and
(l) The storage of garbage and recyclables and waste collection.
[8]
The use must operate and be managed in accordance with the conditions and provisions of the approved Site Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plan may be amended from time to time to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
[9]
Before the development starts, a Waste Management Plan for the student accommodation use to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the Waste management Plan will be endorsed and then form part of the permit. Waste collections must be in accordance with the approved Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
The allotments are to be consolidated or a subdivision boundary restructure carried out in conjunction with the development and consistent with the permit approval requirements, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
[10]
Prior to any works commencing on the land a "Construction Management Plan" (CMP) must be prepared to the satisfaction and approval of the Responsible Authority, detailing how the owner will manage the environmental and construction issues associated with the development.
[11]
any demolition;
bulk excavation;
management of the construction site;
land disturbance;
hours of construction;
noise;
control of dust;
public safety;
traffic management;
construction vehicle road routes;
soiling and cleaning of roadways;
discharge of any polluted water;
security fencing;
disposal of site waste and any potentially contaminated materials;
location of site offices;
redirection of any above or underground services; and
site security lighting.
[12]
The CMP shall include a requirement that suitable washing facilities be provided and utilised on site for the cleaning of all construction vehicles prior to them exiting the designated property so as to prevent any grease, oil, mud, clay or other substance to fall or run off a vehicle onto a road, into any drain or under the road.
[13]
The CMP must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and a contact name and phone numbers for the site manager must be provided to the Responsible Authority.
[14]
Only those trees marked 'tree to be removed' on the endorsed plan may be removed.
[15]
No other vegetation on site, shown as an existing tree or shrub on the endorsed plan, shall be destroyed, felled, lopped or uprooted without the written consent of the Responsible Authority (other than in accordance with a Notice given pursuant to the Local Government Act).
[16]
All existing vegetation to be retained shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority including suitable management during any construction stage.
[17]
A Tree Management Plan (TMP) must be submitted and endorsed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to commencement of building and works and include the following requirements:
(a) Erection of tree protection barriers for existing trees to be retained (on site and in the road reservation) prior to commencement of any building and/or works (including demolition).
(b) No open trenching or service installation within the TPZ prescribed for trees to be retained, (and shall be re-routed or bored under the root zone).
(c) Any proposed pruning and/or lopping works for trees to be retained shall be done by a qualified arborist, in accordance with Australian Standard AS 4373-1996, and a tree works plan shall be submitted to the Responsible Authority and obtain written approval prior to undertaking such works.
[18]
Once approved, the TMP becomes part of the endorsed plans of this permit.
[19]
No building or works shall be commenced (and no trees or vegetation shall be removed) until a landscape plan prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced person or firm has been submitted to and endorsed by the Responsible Authority. This plan when endorsed shall form part of this permit. This plan shall be generally in accordance with the landscape plan prepared by Matthew McFall Landscape Architects drawing No LC685 1 and 2 dated 3 July 2008 and shall show:
(a) A survey of all existing vegetation, abutting street trees, natural features and vegetation.
(b) Buildings, outbuildings and trees in neighbouring lots that would affect the landscape design.
(c) A schedule of the botanical name of all trees and shrubs proposed to be retained and those to be removed incorporating any relevant requirements of condition No. 1.
(d) The proposed design features such as paths, paving, lawn & mulch.
(e) A planting schedule of all proposed vegetation (trees, shrubs and ground covers) which includes, botanical names, common names, pot size, mature size and total quantities of each plant.
Landscaping in accordance with the approved landscaping plan and schedule shall be completed before the building is occupied.
[20]
12. The driveway shall be suitably treated in either materials or method of construction to minimise disturbance to the water and nutrient regime of the tree to be retained and to avoid damage to the root system to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
[21]
13. The existing street trees shall not be removed or damaged.
[22]
14. The garden areas shown on the endorsed plan and schedule shall only be used as gardens and shall be maintained in a proper, tidy and healthy condition to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Should any tree or shrub be removed or destroyed it may be required to be replaced by a tree or shrub of similar size and variety.
[23]
15. The Applicant/Owner shall be responsible to meet all costs associated with reinstatement and/or alterations to Council or other Public Authority assets deemed necessary by such Authorities as a result of the development. The Applicant/Owner shall be responsible for obtaining an "Asset Protection Permit" from Council at least 7 days prior to the commencement of any works on the land and obtain prior specific written approval for any works involving the alteration of Council or other Public Authority assets.
[24]
Discharge of stormwater from the land will be required by means of an underground pipe drainage system designed on the basis of a 10 year average storm recurrence interval and discharging into an approved outlet in a street or an underground pipe drain to the requirements of the Responsible Authority. In this regard no water shall be discharged from any pipe or paved area onto the surface of any adjacent land.
[25]
17. All stormwater drainage within the development site and associated with the building(s) must be completed to the satisfaction of the Building Surveyor prior to the occupation of the building(s).
[26]
18. All stormwater drains shall be connected to a legal point of discharge as determined by Council's Drainage Management Engineer.
[27]
Prior to the commencement of any works on the subject land a site development layout plan together with detailed design plans and specifications for outfall drainage external to the site shall be submitted for approval by the Responsible Authority. All outfall drainage works must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to the occupation of buildings.
[28]
19. The stormwater discharge from the development site is to be restricted in accordance with the requirements of Council's Drainage Policy No. 2.
[29]
20. The car parking areas and accessways as shown on the endorsed plans shall be formed to such levels so that they may be used in accordance with the plan, and shall be properly constructed, surfaced, drained and line- marked (where applicable). The car park and driveways shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
[30]
21. Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times.
[31]
22. The building cladding finish, textures and colours shall be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
[32]
23. All external lights must be of a limited intensity to ensure no nuisance is caused to nearby residential properties and must be provided with approved baffles, so that no direct light or glare is emitted outside the site.
[33]
24. Alarms must be directly connected to a security service and must not produce noise beyond the premises.
[34]
25. Any plant and equipment proposed on the roof of the building must be screened in a manner to complement the appearance of the building to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
[35]
26. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
[36]
(a) The use and development is not commenced within two years of the date of this permit
(b) The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.
[37]
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.
[3] The Box Hill Activity Centre Precinct Plan at Clause 22.07 also includes the review site and shows it within a Mixed Use precinct.
[40]
[5] Submissions on Amendment C87 to the Whitehorse Planning Scheme were required to be submitted by 7 April 2008. A Panel hearing was conducted on 20 June 2008 and the Panel report, dated July 2008, was released to the public in August 2008.
[41]
[6] At pages 22 and 23 of Whitehorse Planning Scheme Amendment C87 Student Accommodation Policy Panel Report, July 2008.
[42]
[7] Clauses 12.01 A more compact city; 12.05 A great place to be; 14.01 Planning for urban settlement; 16.02 Medium density housing; 19.03 Design and built form; 21.06 Housing; 22.03 Residential Development; 32.01 Residential 1 Zone; 55 Two Or More Dwellings On A Lot And Residential Buildings.
[43]
[9] Document headed 'Confidential Internal Working Document' and containing report signed by officers on 17 January 2008 on the application for permit and provided as part of the Practice Note 2 material.
[11] Noting that Ms Buckeridge advised that there were a number of corrections to plans required to ensure that elevations and floor plans correlated, a matter that can be addressed by a condition on permit.
[46]
[12] It is noted that the height and permeability of screening of balconies is not clearly indicated on the plans and this would need to be addressed by condition on permit ensuring compliance with standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6.
[47]
[13] Based on 1 car space per dwelling/student unit and 1 visitor car space per 5 dwellings.
[48]
[14] Provided in Table 4 of the expert evidence of Mr Walsh dated 18 July 2008.
[49]
[15] As shown in Table 5 of the expert evidence provided by Mr Walsh of dated 18 July 2008.
[50]
[16] 2 hour parking restrictions apply to both sides of Carrington Road between 7.30am and 7.30pm Monday to Friday.
[51]
[17] Box Hill train station and bus depot is located approximately 500m to the east, a tram route is some 300m to the north and a bus route traverses Carrington Road.
[52]
[18] Provided in an internal referral dated 3 September 2007 from City of Whitehorse Traffic Engineering Department.
[53]
[19] At 18.03 Bicycle transport and 21.08 Infrastructure.
[54]
[20] Student Accommodation Study prepared for the City of Whitehorse by Macroplan Australia October 2006
Melbourne Housing Group Pty Ltd v Whitehorse CC [2008] VCAT 1974 (26 September 2008)
Ms Marshall submitted that the key issue in this case was whether the proposal can find strategic justification and it was Council's contention that it cannot. This contention was based on the following:
The proposal fails to take adequate guidance from the clear strategic direction at the local level for this area which advocates incremental change that is respectful of neighbourhood character.
The site is not in a location that has been designated for substantial change and this is not a case where neighbourhood character objectives ought to be outweighed by the State and local policies seeking intensification of development.
The three storey height proposed will stand in contrast to the predominantly single storey buildings in this section of Carrington Road and the inclusion of three buildings in a row at this height will magnify the impact on the streetscape and adjoining properties creating a development which is not respectful of neighbourhood character.
The proposal is contrary to the Box Hill Transit City Activity Centre Structure Plan 2007 which excludes the site from residential areas identified as suitable for higher densities of development on the periphery of the Box Hill Activity Centre.
The proposal fails to meet the locational criteria contained in the draft Student Accommodation policy proposed to be included in the Scheme under Amendment C87 since the site is not on a main road which is not part of the Principal Public Transport Network.
In support of this position Ms Marshall referred us to a Tribunal decision Hu v Whitehorse C [2006] VCAT 1750 where a site within proximity to the Box Hill Activity Centre within a natural change area, as identified in local policy, was found to be unsuitable for a three storey development.
Respondent objectors submitted that the proposal was a significant overdevelopment of the site and disrespectful of the neighbourhood character in terms of height and form and that the proposal is contrary to the natural change designation identified in Council policy where modest level of change is sought. Ms Sharples argued that the most recent strategic work undertaken by Council is reflected in the Box Hill Transit City Activity Centre Structure Plan 2007 and this excludes the review site from areas identified as appropriate for increased density of development. In her view this should take precedence over the Box Hill Urban Design Framework 2002.
Mr Tweedie submitted that there is strong policy support for the proposal and relied on the evidence of Mr McGurn that:
There is a high level of State Planning Policy support for an intensive residential redevelopment of this strategically well located and consolidated land parcel.
The review site is identified as part of the Box Hill Activity Centre in the current scheme where medium to higher density development is encouraged.
The inclusion of the site within the natural change area does not preclude support for a development which appropriately responds to neighbourhood character.
When applying the policy criteria contemplated by Amendment C87 the site is an ideal candidate for student housing.
Diversity in housing stock is encouraged under various state and local provisions.
We find that there is considerable strategic support for the proposal in the existing Scheme based on the following.
The Municipal Strategic Statement identifies that additional dwellings are desirable in Whitehorse to provide housing choice to meet changing housing needs, especially to cater for the reduction in household size, and to enable the City to contribute to reducing Melbourne's outward growth. This is supported by State Policy in objectives for increased housing diversity and improving housing choice.
The Box Hill Activity Centre is identified as being important to meet the emerging needs of smaller households near transport, commercial and community facilities and facilitation of development in the centre in accordance with the Box Hill Urban Design Framework 2002 (UDF) is sought.[2]
The UDF seeks, amongst other things, to develop a greater diversity of residential opportunities in and around the Box Hill Business District and includes the review site in Precinct 2 Mixed Use where medium to higher density housing is encouraged.[3] Based on the proximity of Precinct 2 to the retail core, the UDF states the overall objective for the area is to ensure a close relationship between the two precincts and to utilise valuable land to its full potential. Emerging housing markets in the business district are identified as including:
Smaller self-contained affordable housing with less car dependency appropriate to smaller households
Campus style housing and/or medium rise apartments and serviced apartments to service students and educational/health related visitors.
Affordable housing including student hostels and boarding houses.
We find the inclusion of the site in an area designated for high and medium density housing together with acknowledgment of the need to provide housing which caters for smaller households and students in the UDF provides strategic support for the proposal. We consider the proximity of the site to the services and facilities of the Box Hill Activity Centre and to tertiary educational facilities make this an appropriate strategic direction and one strongly supported by State policy which seeks increased density of residential development in areas with these locational advantages to meet urban consolidation aims.
Concurrent with the designation of the review site in an area suitable for high to medium density development is the inclusion of the site in an 'area of natural change' under the Residential Development Policy as distinct from other nominations of 'minimal change' and 'substantial change'.[4] The 'areas of natural change' are where a modest level of change is anticipated to accommodate future increases in dwelling stock. We accept that this designation envisages a level of development which is less than might be anticipated in an area of 'substantial change' but we are satisfied that it does not preclude increased intensity of development provided new development responds sensitively to its context in terms of both site constraints and neighbourhood character. We address this matter later in considering built form and neighbourhood character.
There are two proposed policies relevant to the proposal. Firstly the Box Hill Transit City Activity Centre Structure Plan 2007 (the 'Structure Plan') which has been adopted by Council. We acknowledge Ms Marshall's submission that this document reflects the most recent strategic thinking of Council. However, the weight we give this document must be limited as it has not been incorporated in the Scheme, it is not a reference document and has not been tested via the amendment process.
The Structure Plan excludes the site from the Activity Centre Study Area. The north side of Carrington Road, opposite the review site, is included in a Peripheral Residential Precinct where new development supporting higher densities is sought. The eastern end of Carrington Road (east of Thurston Street) is included in a Major Development Precinct with taller buildings permitted. While we accept that there is no policy support for high density residential development on the review site under the Structure Plan, we do not accept that this prevents consideration of well designed residential development at an increased density which responds appropriately to current policies, site context and meets the objectives to ResCode.
The second proposed policy relevant to the application is the Student Accommodation Policy proposed under Amendment C87. This policy has been exhibited as part of an amendment and has been considered by an independent Panel.[5] As the final form of the policy is unknown, the weight we place on it must be restricted.
Failure to meet the locational criteria set in the exhibited Student Accommodation Policy was a ground of refusal by Council. The locational criteria proposed is:
No evidence was submitted to demonstrate that the flow of international students was diminishing or that available single accommodation in close proximity to educational institutions would not be taken up by domestic students. However, the lack of need for a proposal has not generally been seen by the Tribunal as a ground for refusing a permit. (See, Shell Company of Australia Pty Ltd and Ors v City of Frankston and Anor8 APAD 127 at 135 and Melbourne International Student Accommodation v Boroondara City Council[2004] VCAT 800.)