[2019] VCAT 718
General information, not legal advice.
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal
2019-05-15
Original judgment source is linked above.
Childcare centre car parking, traffic and waste collection
459-471 Church Street and 20-26 Brighton Street, Richmond.
all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
[1] Mr Gobbo advised during the hearing Professor Jacques was unable to attend the scheduled hearing but that the applicant would proceed without calling him acknowledging that his evidence would be given lesser weight having not been tested through questions of other parties.
[2] Section 4(2)(d) of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 states a failure to make a decision is deemed to be a decision to refuse to make the decision.
[3] 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.
[4] Clause 17.01-1S and further supported in Clause 21.03
[5] Clause 17.02-1S - paraphrased. This also links to Clause 15.02-1S Energy and resource efficiency and 15
[6] Clause 18.02-2R noting the tram routes on Church Street and Swan Street as well as the Richmond and East Richmond train stations form part of the PPTN all within easy walking distance of the site. There are also bus routes along Punt Road, approximately 1km away from the site.
[8] Clause 22.05-2 Interfaces Uses Policy, our paraphrasing of the two objectives.
[16] This is the east side of Church Street and includes the review site.
[17] This includes land on the west side of Church Street south of Albert Street.
[18] Mr O'Brien's submission also refers to views to the Nylex Plastics Sign, Slade Knitwear sign and the Dimmey's Ball Tower.
[19] Notably: Rescom QOD Lennox Street Pty Ltd v Yarra CC [2013] VCAT 1799, ADMA Group Pty Ltd v Yarra CC [2018] VCAT 309, Renaissance United Assets Management Pty Ltd v Yarra CC [2018] VCAT 103
[20] See Clause 34.02-7 - Decision Guidelines
[22] After a sentence referring to Church Street as an activity centre based on furniture and homeware, professional and business services and hospitality.
[23] The current zoning controls limit the height of development on the site to 9 metres. The likelihood of the windows being built out is subject to existing planning controls changing.
[24] Indeed more of the land west of the C2Z area west of Church Street is in NRZ1 than to the east where there are greater 'patches' of GRZ2.
[25] From Pages 17 and 18 of Mr De Young's evidence statement. This notes the average parking rate is 0.77 car spaces per 100 square metres across a number of buildings surveyed in similar areas.
[26] The widening of the footpath reduces to match into the approved widening associated with the endorsed plans for redevelopment of 18 Brighton Street.
[27] 750 north of James Street and 1,400 south of James Street.
[28] Traffic Impact - Traffic and transport Assessment 2 July 2018 for the proposal states traffic volume studies were undertaken for Shamrock and Brighton Street - Tuesday 6 March 2018 to Monday 12 March 2018. Monday 12 March 2018 was a public holiday.
[29] A base that maybe is higher given it is derived from the traffic survey data that included a long weekend.
[30] This proposal has now been granted a permit for 118 children generally from 7am to 7pm. See Manderson v Yarra CC [2019] VCAT 455
[31] The 2018 survey that includes Labour day indicates 1, 400 vpd. Mr De Young advised this could be conservatively be upgraded to 1,700 but that the additional traffic was still more than reasonable the capacity of Brighton Street.
Salta Properties Pty Ltd
Yarra CC [2019] VCAT 718